f — ' — 

University  of  California. 


•M      MIT     I  IKKAKY 

DR.     FRANCIS     LIKI5KR, 
Pr-f.—oi  ,,f  Jli#f.ry  iiml  l.nw  in  Colaml-ia  Cdlcge,  Now  Y« 

nil.  ,, 

MICHAEL     REESE 
<\f  ^nn  Fran 


rk. 


THE 


CHURCH  AND  THE  REBELLION: 


A   CONSIDERATION  OF 


THE    EEBELLIOE" 


THE    GOVERNMENT  •  OF  THE    UNITED    STATES ; 


AND   THE 


AGENCY  OF   THE   CHURCH,  NORTH  AND   SOUTH, 


IN   RELATION   THERETO. 


BY  R.  L.  STANTON,  D.D., 

PROFESSOR   IN    THE   THKOLOGICAL   SEMINARY   OF  THE   PRESBYTERIAN   CHURCH 
DANVILLE,   KENTUCKY. 


NEW  YORK: 
DERBY  &  MILLER,  5  SPRUCE  STREET 

1864. 


AX8 


Entered  according  to  Act  of  Congress,  in  the  year  1864, 
BY  DERBY  &  MILLER, 

In  the  Clerk's  Office  of  the  District  Court  of  the  United  States  for  the  Southern 
District  of  New  York. 


O.    A.    ALVORD,    STEREOTYPES  AND    PEINTBB. 


TO  THE 

YOUNG  MEN  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES, 

OP 

EVERY   CREED    IN  RELIGION   AND  EVERY   PARTY  IN  POLITICS, 
WHO    PREFER 

FREEDOM    TO    SLAVERY; 

WHO     ARE     LOYAL     TO     THEIR     COUNTRY, 

AND    WHO    ARE 

AIDING   TO   SUSTAIN   ITS   GOVERNMENT   AGAINST   REBELLION: 


IS  MOST  RESPECTFULLY  DEDICATED 
BY 


THE  AUTHOR. 


PREFACE. 


THIS  volume  does  not  claim  to  be  a  History, 
though  some  of  its  chapters  are  chiefly  historical. 
The  time  for  writing  the  History  of  the  Rebellion 
has  not  come.  It  is,  however,  just  as  opportune 
now  as  it  will  be  at  any  future  period,  to  inquire 
into  the  causes  of  the  revolt  against  the  Govern 
ment  of  the  United  States,  and  to  examine  the 
agencies  which  have  been  concerned  in  initiating 
and  impelling  it  forward.  These  lie  upon  the  sur 
face  of  observation  and  are  patent  to  all  men.  Time 
can  throw  no  light  upon  them  which  will  essen 
tially  change  their  character. 

Believing  that  the  Church  of  God  in  this  land, — 
or,  properly  speaking,  many  of  those  in  the  differ 
ent  branches  of  the  Church  who  have  been  leaders 
in  its  councils,  and  who  arc  largely  responsible  for 
the  formation  and  character  of  its  public  opinion, 
—may  be  justly  held  to  have  done  much  towards 
precipitating  the  Rebellion,  as  well  as  aiding  it 


VI  PBEFACE. 

during  the  whole  course  of  its  progress,  it  is  one 
aim  of  these  pages  to  set  forth  the  proofs  and  illus 
trations,  in  some  small  degree,  of  a  record  so  deeply 
humiliating.  No  complaint  need  "be  entered  in  "be 
half  of  those  whose  conduct  we  unfold.  Least  of 
all  will  they  themselves  complain,  for  they  glory 
in  what  they  have  done,  and  call  on  the  world  to 
applaud  them. 

There  is  another  reason  why  it  is  essential  to  ex 
amine  this  record.  Politicians,  secular  and  reli 
gious  journals,  pamphleteers,  men  in  all  classes  of 
society,  freely  lay  the  blame  of  this  Rebellion,  in 
a  great  measure,  or  wholly,  at  the  door  of  the 
Church ;  charging  the  ministry,  more  especially, 
with  having  caused  it.  This  is  a  very  prevalent 
sentiment,  if  we  may  judge  from  what  has  been 
said  and  written.  There  is  undoubtedly  justice  or 
injustice  in  the  charge,  according  to  the  direction 
given  to  it.  It  is  then  essential  that  the  matter  be 
probed,  so  that  if  the  Church  or  its  ministers  are 
improperly  impugned,  they  may  have  justice  done 
them  ;  and  that  the  really  guilty  may  be  held  re 
sponsible. 

We  have  examined  many  works  which  have  is- 


PREFACE.  VU 

sued  from  the  press,  calculated  to  elucidate  certain 
phases  of  the  Rebellion  and  the  War,  but  we  have 
observed  no  one  designed  to  meet  the  demand 
which  this  volume  is  intended  to  supply,  or  which 
at  all  occupies  the  ground  which  several  of  its 
chapters  cover. 

We  are  indebted  to  many  writers  for  the  facts  we 
present,  and  as  far  as  possible  have  endeavored  to 
give  them  credit  in  the  body  of  the  work,  though 
omissions  may  have  occurred. 

With  this  statement  of  the  object  of  this  vol-  ••• 
ume,  we  lay  it  before  the  public,  in  the  confident 
hope  that  the  Church  and  the  Nation  may  soon 
come  out  of  this  strife,  purified  and  invigorated, 
restored  to  those  principles  which  were  the  glory 
of  the  earlier  and  better  days  of  the  Republic,  and 
prepared  for  that  great  mission  to  which  we  have 
always  fondly  believed  they  were  destined  by  the 
Ruler  of  the  whole  earth. 

NEW  YORK,  August,  1864. 


CONTENTS. 


CHAPTER    I. 
CHARACTER  OF  THE  REBELLION Page  1-35 

Against  Popular  Government,  1 ;  Southern  Domination  in  the  Government,  3 ; 
False  charges  by  the  South,  5 ;  Against  all  Measures  for  Peace,  7 ;  Perpetrated 
by  fraud  and  violence,  16;  Prosecuted  by  cruelty  and  terror,  21 ;  Its  desolation 
of  the  country,  27;  It  aimed  to  usurp  the  Government,  28;  Popular  Govern 
ment  universally  endangered,  32 ;  To  perpetuate  Negro  Slavery,  34 

CHAPTER    II. 

CAUSE  OF  THE  REBELLION " 36-70 

Slavery  the  cause,  36;  An  opposite  view,  38;  In  what  sense  Slavery  is  the  cause, 
40 ;  Modern  views  and  power  of  Slavery,  42 ;  Proof  that  Slavery  is  the  cause — 
official  testimony,  45 ;  Individual  witnesses  that  Slavery  is  the  cause,  48 ;  Testi 
mony  of  Religious  bodies  to  the  same  effect,  51 ;  Incidental  confirmatory  evi 
dence,  54;  All  Slave  States  officially  claimed,  55;  Unlimited  extension  of  Slavery, 
57;  The  restrictive  policy,  58;  The  expansive  policy,  60;  Eeopening  of  the 
African  Slave  trade,  61 ;  Reopening  of  the  trade  denied,  62 ;  Proof  of  the  de 
signed  reopening  of  the  trade,  64;  The  cause  fully  developed,  68. 

CHAPTER    III. 
RESPONSIBILITY  FOR  THE  REBELLION 71-105 

Abolitionists  charged  with  the  responsibility,  72 ;  Fallacious  reasoning  to  sustain 
the  diargfi,  73;  They  would  discuss  the  subject,  74;  Abduction  of  Slaves,  75; 
The  whole  North  charged  with  it,  70;  Abolitionists  not  Republicans,  77;  Aboli 
tionists  complimented — the  People  disparaged,  78;  Responsibility  of  Abolition 
ists  disclaimed  at  the  South,  81 ;  Discussion  the  germ  of  the  troubling  element, 
84;  "What  class  of  Northern  men  responsible,  87;  Responsibility  among  Politi 
cians,  North,  87;  Responsibility  among  Churchmen,  North,  88;  Southside  view 
of  Northern  Clergymen,  89 ;  Responsibility  of  Northern  men  thus  determined, 
93;  Northern  responsibility  in  another  light,  96;  Slavery  may  be  examined  at 
the  North,  97  ;  A  subject  for  all  mankind,  99  ;  Free  society  pitied  and  lamented, 
100  ;  Slavery  the  proper  condition  for  all  laborers,  101 ;  Who,  now,  is  responsi 
ble  ?  104. 

CHAPTER    IV. 
RESPONSIBILITY  FOR  BEGINNING  AND  CONTINUING  THE  TVAR.   106-151 

John  Minor  Botts  on  Secession,  107;  Narrative  of  events,  108;  Rebel  Covernment 
formed — the  South  arming,  110;  Our  Government  inactive,  110;  Siege  of  Fort 


CONTENTS. 

Sumter,  111 ;  Congress  not  aggressive — Stir  of  the  "West,  112;  New  Administra 
tion — attack  on  Fort  Sumter,  114;  The  unavoidable  issue,  115;  Gen.  McClellan's 
opinion,  116;  Southern  assumptions  vs.  "Northern  aggressions,"  117;  Diplo 
matists  from  South  Carolina,  118;  Their  demand  insolent,  120;  What  President 
Buchanan  intended,  122;  Hypocrisy  of  their  peaceful  pretensions,  123;  Irrefra 
gable  position  of  the  President,  124;  Further  negotiations — Confederate  Com 
missioners,  125;  Peaceful  solution  declined,  128;  Unjustifiable  reasons  for  refusal, 
130;  The  Commissioners  defiantly  court  War,  131;  A  Diplomatic  quibble,  132; 
Public  facts  decide  the  case,  134;  Rebel  conditions  of  Peace  since  the  War  be 
gan,  135;  The  Rebel  President  and  Rebel  Congress  on  Peace,  187;  They  mis 
represent  the  case,  139 ;  The  real  question  ignored  by  the  Rebels,  141 ;  Rebel 
official  mendacity,  148;  Another  effort  for  Peace— Niagara  Falls  Conference, 
146 ;  Mission,  to  Richmond— Peace  again,  148. 


CHAPTER   Y. 

RESPONSIBILITY  OF  THE  SOUTHERN  CHURCH  FOR  THE  REBELLION  AND 

THE  WAR Page  152-206 

Early  agency  of  leading  Divines,  155;  Dr.  Thornwell  aids  the  Rebellion,  155;  His 
Fast-Day  Discourse,  Nov.  21, 1860,  157;  He  vindicates  the  Secession  of  South 
Carolina,  158 ;  Open  resistance  counselled,  159 ;  Charge  of  Treason  established, 
160;  Drs.  Thornwell,  Leland,  Adger,  and  others,  upon  the  stump,  161 ;  Early  aid 
of  Dr.  Palmer,  163 ;  Dr.  Palmer  and  the  mission  of  Senator  Toombs,  163 ;  Speci 
men  of  his  Thanksgiving  Discourse,  165;  Resistance  counselled — "the  last 
ditch,"  167;  War  welcomed — the  tJnion  denounced,  167;  Prophecy  fulfilled  un 
expectedly,  168 ;  His  Sermon  steeped  in  sin,  guilt,  and  crime,  169;  He  further 
vindicates  Secession,  170 ;  Dr.  Smyth  strikes  the  same  chord,  171;  Judgment 
and  blessing,  172;  Resistance  universally  instilled,  172;  The  Clergy  of  all  De 
nominations  aid  the  Rebellion,  173;  Leading  Clergymen  in  the  Rebel  army,  174; 
Many  Ministers  go  South  and  aid  the  Rebellion,  175;  Other  Rebel  Clergymen  at 
the  South,  176;  Southern  Churches  organized  in  aid  of  the  Rebellion,  177;  Ad 
dresses  of  Southern  Churches  sustaining  the  Rebellion,  179;  The  Presbyterian 
Church,  179;  The  Protestant  Episcopal  Church,  ISO:  Christian  Association,  181 ; 
The  Baptist  Church,  1S2 ;  Methodists,  Baptists,  Episcopalians,  Presbyterians, 
Lutherans,  German  Reformed,  and  other  Churches,  Ninety-six  Ministers,  183; 
Southern  Religious  press  on  the  Rebellion,  184 ;  At  New  Orleans,  1 S4 ;  At  Co 
lumbia,  S.  C.,  185;  At  Richmond,  Va.,  186;  At  Fayetteville,  N.  C.,  1S7;  Educa 
tion  in  aid  of  the  Rebellion,  1SS;  Great  Southern  University,  189 ;  Disunion — 
Fighting  men  to  be  educated,  189 ;  Endowment,  five  or  ten  millions,  191 ;  Pro 
fessorship  on  Patriotism,  191;  Episcopal  University  of  the  South,  192;  Rebel 
Major-General  Hill  as  au  Educator,  193;  His  hatred  of  the  North,  194;  He 
teaches  Secession  by  algebra,  194;  Specimen  of  algebraic  problems,  195;  Aid 
of  the  Church  indispensable  to  the  Rebellion,  196;  This  aid  acknowledged  by 
Rebel  Statesmen,  197;  A  Statesman's  view  indorsed,  198;  The  Church  led  the 
Politicians,  199;  The  proof  conclusive,  200;  Loyal  Clergymen  in  the  Border 
States,  201 ;  Loyalty  of  Northern  Churches— their  duty,  202;  Duty  of  the  South 
ern  Church  the  same,  204. 


CONTENTS. 


CHAPTER  VI. 
CLERICAL  DISLOYALTY  IN  LOYAL  STATES Page  207-240 

Clerical  Sympathizers  in  Maryland,  208 ;  Disloyal  Ministers  in  the  District  of  Colum 
bia,  209 ;  Rebel  Sympathizers  among  Kentucky  Clergymen,  211 ;  Rev.  Thomas  A. 
Hoyt,  211 ;  Mr.  Hoyt's  Disloyal  Sermon,  212;  Political  Preaching  Defined,  214;  Re 
ligious  Preaching  defined,  215 ;  War  preached  in  the  name  of  Peace,  216 :  The  grand 
distinction— Religion  and  Politics,  217;  No  possible  Neutrality,  218 ;  Dr.  Stuart 
Robinson,  219 ;  He  edits  a  Disloyal  paper,  220 ;  Its  Disloyal  course  in  general,  222 ; 
It  vilifies  the  Church  for  Loyalty,  223 ;  It  abuses  the  Government,  224 ;  Speci 
mens  of  its  Disloyalty — his  position  defined,  227 ;  God's  "  curse"  with  the  Presi 
dent,  229  ;  The  War  charged  on  Northern  men,  230 ;  Our  Government  worse  than 
the  French  Revolutionists,  231 ;  Charge  of  Disloyalty,  233 ;  Calumny  self-refuted, 
233 ;  The  Remedy — two  examples,  234 ;  Government  Orders  vindicated,  236 ; 
Church  application  vindicated  by  the  facts,  239 ;  Chief  ground  of  complaint,  241 ; 
Government  and  Church  vindicated  by  the  Law,  242;  Vindicated  by  Rebel  au 
thority,  244 

CHAPTER  VII. 
THE  CHURCH,  NORTH  AND  SOUTH,  ON  DISLOYALTY 247-275 

All  men  subject  to  Civil  authority,  248 ;  Obedience  to  Civil  authority  a  Religious 
duty.  248  ^Ministers  to_JUJ.rtni)li  mitijf  rtinn^jjtg;  Omission  of  this  duty  a  sin, 
250 ;  The  crowning  guilt,  251 ;  Disloyalty  punishable  by  the  State,  252 ;  What 
Loyalty  and  Disloyalty  are,  253 ;  Disloyalty  punishable  by  the  Church,  254 ; 
Reasons  founded  on  Revelation,  255 ;  Spiritual  jurisdiction  broader  than  Civil, 
256 ;  Disloyalty  actually  condemned  by  the  Church,  258 ;  Presbyterian  Church 
—Dr.  McPheeters,  259 ;  Individual  opinions  in  the  General  Assembly,  261 ;  Dr. 
McPheeters  on  Military  Orders,  264;  False  criterion  of  Loyalty,  265;  Gen. 
Rosecrans's  Orders,  268 ;  "  Honor  to  whom  honor,"  271 ;  Doom  of  Traitors— self- 
condemnation,  273. 

CHAPTER  VHI. 

SOUTHERN  PROVIDENCE  IN  THE  REBELLION 276-302 

God's  providence  extends  to  Nations,  276 ;  Its  designs  toward  the  United  States, 
277;  The  dead  fly  in  the  ointment,  278;  The  Irrepressible  Conflict,  279;  The 
difficulty  beyond  human  wisdom,  280 :  Hopes  dashed  and  raised  again,  281 ; 
Providence  from  a  Southern  stand-point,  282 ;  It  upsets  their  Theology,  284 ; 
The  true  doctrine  of  Providence,  286;  Southern  exposition  of  it— Dr.  Palmer, 
286;  Providence  frustrated,  287  ;  Southern  Theology  rebuked  by  Scripture,  288; 
Providential  rule  supreme,  290;  An  explanation  needed,  291;  A  solution  pro 
posed,  292;  A  providence  of  man's  devising,  292;  Southern  providence  further 
illustrated— Dr.  Smyth,  293 ;  Blasphemy  and  Fanaticism  sublimated,  294 ;  The 
providential  climax— Dr.  Stiles,  295;  The  Southern  Confederacy  to  usher  in  the 
Millennium,  296;  Rebel  Victories  by  miracle,  298;  A  new  Siege  of  Jericho,  298 ; 
The  Confederate  Armageddon,  300. 


Xll  CONTENTS. 


CHAPTER  IX. 
PROVIDENTIAL  DESIGNS  IN  THE  REBELLION Page  303-362 

Slavery  to  be  terminated,  305 ;  Manner  of  its  termination,  306 ;  Action  in  certain 
Border  States,  308;  Signs  of  its  termination— the  Loyal  States,  310  ;  Fugitive 
Slave  Law  repealed,  311;  Slaves  freed  by  the  War,  312;  All  traceable  to  the  Re 
bellion,  813;  Termination  of  Slavery  in  the  Rebel  States,  314;  Slavery  doomed, 
though  Disunion  triumph,  316;  Internal  causes  of  its  destruction,  317;  Illustra 
tive  incident— Colunel  Dahlgren,  SIS;  Facts  and  their  Lesson,  319;  War  educa 
ting  Slaves  for  Freedom,  320;  External  causes  of  its  destruction,  321;  Environed 
by  enemies,  322;  Cotton  Dreams,  323;  Slavery  doomed  and  the  Union  main 
tained,  824;  Reasons  for  this  position,  326 ;  Strength  of  the  parties  in  Soldiers, 
82T;  Negro  Soldiers— their  number  unlimited,  329 ;  White  Soldiers  sufficient, 
830;  National  Resources  and  Credit,  331;  The  Result.  332;  Governmental  de 
termination  confronted,  332  ;  Opposition  to  Slavery  fighting  against  God,  334 ; 
The  Government  vindicated  in  destroying  Slavery,  335 ;  Its  right  of  self-preser 
vation,  336;  Destruction  of  Slavery  a  lawful  means  to  this  end,  33S;  Forbear 
ance  of  the  Government  with  Slavery,  340;  Emancipation  Proclamation,  342; 
Its  final  determination  justified,  343;  Sustained  by  the  Laws  of  War,  344;  Sus 
tained  by  examples  of  several  Nations — Great  Britain,  France,  346;  Spain,  Co 
lombia,  United  States,  347;  Illustrated  by  cases  in  the  United  States — Generals 
Jesup,  Taylor,  Gaines,  Presidents  Van  Buren,  Tyler,  and  Congress,  347;  An 
other  case  between  Great  Britain  and  the  United  States — decision  of  the  Rus 
sian  Emperor  Alexander,  349  ;  Opinions  of  eminent  Statesmen — Jefferson,  J.  Q. 
Adams,  Hamilton,  Jay,  Madison,  850 ;  Vindication  complete  against  idle  decla 
mation,  354;  Sustained  against  the  Rebel  Congress,  354;  Sustained  by  Southern 
men,  356 ;  The  sum  of  Providential  indications,  360. 


CHAPTER  X. 
THE  CHURCH  AND  SLAVERY 363-421 

Three  periods  of  Opinion,  historically,  3G3 ;  The  Church  largely  responsible  for 
Opinion,  366;  Presbyterian  Church  illustrative  of  others,  368;  First  period — 
early  Testimony  of  the  Church,  1787,  369;  Politics  and  Religion— a  Prophet,  370; 
Action  upon  a  case  submitted,  1795,371;  Another  case  acted  upon,  1815,  372; 
The  most  elaborate  Testimony,  1818,  873 ;  Characteristics  of  the  paper  of  ISIS, 
377;  Second  period — more  "conservative"  views,  878;  Action  postponed  in 
1836,  380;  Formal  "  conservative"1  action  of  1845,  382;  Contrast — Action  of  ISIS 
and  1845,  385;  Action  of  1846 — Declaration  of  agreement,  3SS;  Another  contrast 
—1818  and  1S49,  391 ;  A  Protest— Action  of  1845  equivocal,  393 ;  Acrion  of  1861— 
Synod  of  South  Carolina,  894;  Action  of  1863— Repudiation  of  1845.  395;  Review 
of  Testimonies — 1787  to  1863,397;  Corroborative  Testimony  to  the  positions 
taken,  400;  Proof  and  Illustrations,  403;  The  inevitable  effect— Northern  re 
sponsibility,  405;  Action  of  the  General  Assembly  of  1864,  408;  Features  of  the 
Report,  413 ;  Te  Deum  Laudamus,  420. 


CONTENTS.  xiii 


CHAPTER  XL 

KENTUCKY  OPINIONS — THE  PAST  AND  THE  PRESENT Page  422-451 

Paper  of  the  Committee  of  the  Synod  on  Slavery,  in  1S35,  423;  Movement  for 
Emancipation,  in  1849,  440;  Principles  of  tho  State  Emancipation  Convention, 
441;  Emancipationists  defeated  in  the  State— causes,  442;  Presbyterians  unani 
mously  for  Emancipation — Drs.  Breckinridge,  Young,  and  "  Rev.  Mr.  ROBINSON, 
of  Frankfort,1'  443;  Drs.  Humphrey  and  W.  L.  Breckinridge  upon  Emancipation 
in  1849,444;  Position  of  Dr.  R.  J.  Breckinridge  in  1S49,  445;  lion.  Garrett 
Davis  on  Slavery  in  1S49,  449 ;  A  glorious  record  tarnished,  450. 

CHAPTER   XII. 
MODERN  SOUTHERN  YIEWS  OF  SLAVERY 452-472 

Defended  by  Northern  men,  453;  Positions  taken,  454;  Authorities  for  these 
positions,  450;  I.  As  related  to  Natural  and  Municipal  Law,  456;  Dr.  Thorn- 
well,  455;  '-General  Assembly  of  the  Confederate  States,"  457;  Dr.  Seabury, 
457;  The  True  Presbyterian,  457 ;  II.  An  related  to  Divine  Revelation,  453; 
Dr.  Thornwell,  45S  ;  "  General  Assembly  of  the  Confederate  States,''  458 ;  Prof. 
S.  F.  B.  Morse,  459;  Dr.  Stuart  Robinson,  460;  Dr.  Fred.  A.  Ross,  402;  Gen. 
Thomas  R.  R.  Cobb,  402;  Dr.  Thomas  Smyth,  4(53;  Dr.  Seabury,  4G4;  The  True 
Presbyterian,  404;  Dr.  J.  R.  Wilson.  465;  Dr.  Geo.  D.  Armstrong,  465;  Bishop 
Hopkins,  400;  Prof.  Bledsoe,  466;  Dr.  Nehemiah  Adams,  466;  Responsibility  of 
the  Church  for  the  Revolution  in  Southern  Opinion,  467;  Early  position  of  Rev. 
James  Smylie,  463;  Paper  of  the  Synod  of  Mississippi,  469;  Confirmatory  Tes 
timony,  471. 

CHAPTER  XIII. 
SLAVERY  IN  POLEMICS-T-DIVINE  REVELATION 473-509 

Preliminary  considerations,  473;  The  Scriptures  grossly  libelled,  474 ;  Points  of 
difference  between  the  Jewish  and  Southern  systems,  476;  Professorial  judg 
ment  of  the  case,  4S3 ;  Proslavery  arguments  examined,  484;  The  argument 
from  the  Decalogue,  4S5 ;  The  Abrahamic  and  Mosaic  system,  4SS:  Authority 
in  contrast,  490;  The  New  Testament  argument,  492 ;  Slavery  hanging  by  a 
word,  493;  Prof.  Lewis  on  Doulos,  493 ;  Prof.  Lewis  on  Slave-traders,  495;  Sla 
very  among  the  Relations,  497;  The  reductio  ad  absurdurn.  49S;  Slavery  univer 
sally,  essential,  498;  Emancipation  a  sin,  500 ;  Invasion  of  God's  prerogative, 
501;  The  Relations  in  dialogue,  502;  A  Southern  family  established,  504;  Divine 
Ordinances  plain,  506;  The  Servile  Relation  as  an  "  Ordinance,"  506 ;  The  only 
loophole,  and  that  closed,  503. 

CHAPTER  XIY. 

SLAVERY  IN  POLEMICS— LAW  OF  XATURE - 510-538 

Disagreement  on  what  is  the  Law  of  Nature,  510  ;  Disagreement  in  applying  the  Law 
of  Nature,  512;  Moral  phases  involved  in  the  application,  513;  Illustrative  con 
tradictious,  514;  Slavery  against  Nature— Code  of  Justinian,  515;  The  Justinian 
Code  overthrown,  516;  Slavery  from  an  Ant-hill,  51S;  Ant-slavery— Striking 


XIV  CONTENTS. 

analogies,  519 ;  Slave-trade  justified,  520 ;  Cannibalism  justified  on  similar  ground, 
521 ;  Its  practical  advantages,  521 ;  Dr.  Thornwell's  argument  from  Nature,  523 ; 
Pagan  an  example  for  Christian  States,  525;  Slavery  submitted  to  a  popular  vote, 
626;  The  inevitable  conclusion,  527;  American  Slavery  founded  on  Human  Law, 
627;  Conflicting  authorities— Law  versus  Divinity,  628;  Origin  of  Negro  Sla 
very  in  the  United  States,  530 ;  Its  History  traced— African  Slave-trade,  530 ; 
Founded  in  Human  Law,  or  without  legality,  532;  Positive  Law — inevitable 
crime,  533 ;  Positive  Law  theory  sustained  by  the  highest  Southern  authority, 
584;  The  impregnable  conclusion,  535 ;  The  consoling  alternative,  536. 

CHAPTER  XV. 
KEYIEW  AND  CONCLUSION Page  539-562 

The  external  situation,  539;  Responsibility  of  Foreign  Powers,  540;  The  coming 
reckoning,  542 ;  Retributive  Justice,  543 ;  Essential  discriminations,  543 ;  Pocket 
Philanthropy,  544;  Our  cause  misrepresented,  545 ;  Foreign  enmity  persistent, 
545;  The  popular  masses  with  us,  546;  The  internal  situation,  548;  What  the 
contest  exhibits,  548 ;  Friends  and  foes,  550;  Subordinate  questions,  551 ;  Ad 
ministration  and  Government,  552 ;  True  principle  of  support — Objections,  553 ; 
Opposing  the  Administration — change  demanded,  555 ;  Loyalty  practically  tested, 
556;  Loyalty  above  partisanship— Violence,  557;  God  reigns— Our  trust,  559; 
The  Patriot's  Reward,  559 ;  The  Traitor's  Doom,  561. 


THE  CHURCH  AND  THE  REBELLION, 


CHAPTER  I. 

CHARACTER    OF    THE    REBELLION. 

THE  rebellion  against  the  Government  of  the  United 
States,  now  in  the  fourth  year  of  its  progress,  is  among 
the  most  extraordinary  phenomena  in  the  annals  of  man 
kind.  It  is  so  remarkable  in  its  objects,  so  determined  in 
its  spirit,  and  has  brought  into  action,  upon  one  side  and 
the  other,  material  and  moral  forces  of  such  gigantic  mag 
nitude,  that  the  world  stands  appalled  at  the  spectacle  it 
presents. 

In  any  proper  consideration  of  the  subject,  the  logical 
order  brings  us  first  to  look  at  the  character  of  the  rebel 
lion.  It  has  certain  palpable  features  which  might  profita 
bly  admit  of  an  extended  examination.  Our  plan  will 
allow  us  to  give  them  only  a  passing  notice. 

AGAINST  POPULAR   GOVERNMENT. 

1.  The  primal  characteristic  it  exhibits  is  that  of  a  vio 
lent  demonstration  against  the  life-principle  of  Popular 
Government. 

The  ultimate  sovereignty  and  true  source  of  all  political 
power,  under  God,  are  in  the  people,  for  whose  benefit  civil 
society  lias  been  ordained.  In  God's  providence,  mankind 
are  distributed  into  nations,  in  which  political  power  is  to 
be  exercised  through  the  modes  which  the  people  of  each 


2  CHARACTER    OF    THE    REBELLION. 

may  devise.  To  establish  government,  and  to  alter  it^ 
form  or  character,  so  as  to  meet  the  varying  wants  of 
society,  are  among  the  inherent  rights  of  every  people. 
These  are  very  generally  conceded  as  fundamental  princi 
ples  in  political  science.  They  are  denied  by  those  who 
contend  for  the  divine  right  of  kings,  and  who  hold  that 
the  many  were  created  for  the  few ;  but  the  ablest  writers 
acknowledge  these  rights  as  belonging  primarily  to  the 
people,  and  of  which  they  cannot  be  justly  divested. 

In  regard  to  changing  the  government  which  exists  over 
a  people,  either  in  its  form  or  in  matters  of  substance,  the 
modes  are  various.  In  a  monarchy,  a  people  may  wish  to 
go  no  farther  than  to  demand  and  receive  concessions  from 
the  sovereign,  leaving  the  form  and  structure  of  the  gov 
ernment  intact.  Under  a  despotism,  tyranny  may  become 
BO  oppressive  as  to  be  unendurable,  with  no  hope  of  relief 
from  the  ruling  power.  Then,  revolution  may  become  a 
duty.  This  remedy  is  deemed  justifiable  in  extreme  cases, 
and  a  right  which  a  people  can  never  surrender.  The  pro 
priety  of  resorting  to  it  must,  for  the  most  part,  be  deter 
mined  by  the  circumstances  of  each  case. 

In  a  popular  government,  however,  republican  or  demo- 
cratical,  whose  form  and  structure  have  sprung  from  the 
free  consent  of  the  whole  people,  and  where  the  rulers, 
from  the  highest  to  the  lowest,  are  chosen  and  frequently 
changed  by  their  common  suffrages,  the  right  of  violent 
revolution  would  seem  to  be  well-nigh  or  quite  excluded. 
All  abuses  of  power  are  subject  to  that  peaceful  remedy 
which  the  people  always  have  in  their  hands.  Any  branch 
of  the  government,  executive,  legislative,  or  judicial,  which 
usurps  authority,  may  be  speedily  reached  and  the  correc 
tive  applied, — as,  for  example,  in  the  United  States, — by 
impeachment,  or  by  the  ballot.  If  the  remedy  belong 
directly  to  the  people,  the  determination  is  with  the  major- 


SOUTHERN  DOMINATION  IN  THE  GOVERNMENT.     U 

ity,  in  the  manner  prescribed  by  law ;  and,  when  made, 
the  decision  must  be  final  if  the  people  are  the  ultimate 
source  of  power.  A  denial  of  these  simple  principles  ren 
ders  popular  government  impossible.* 

Now,  it  is  the  invasion  of  that  life- principle  which  under 
lies  the  whole  structure  of  popular  government,  that  con 
stitutes  the  primal  item  in  the  catalogue  of  crimes  which 
make  up  the  terrible  guilt  of  this  rebellion.  It  is  an  appeal 
from  the  ballot-box  to  the  sword ;  a  determination  to 
defeat  by  war  the  results  of  a  popular  election,  fairly  con 
ducted  in  all  respects  according  to  the  Constitution  and 
laws,  as  those  who  have  revolted  admit ;  an  election  in 
which  they,  equally  with  the  rest  of  the  nation,  freely 
embarked,  and  by  the  results  of  which  they  were  there 
fore  solemnly  bound.  This  is  the  charge  which  stands 
recorded  against  them  in  the  face  of  the  whole  world. 

SOUTHERN  DOMINATION   IN  THE  GOVERNMENT. 

2.  Another  item  in  the  character  of  the  rebellion  is, 
that  it  is  waged  against  a  Government  whose  administra 
tion  the  rebels,  through  the  party  with  which  they  had 
generally  acted,  had  almost  uniformly  controlled,  from  the 
origin  of  the  Government  •  to  the  time  of  their  revolt,  and 
every  branch  of  which  was  still  in  their  possession. 

This  is  one  of  those  facts  in  our  history,  so  well  known 
and  so  public  that  it  will  scarcely  be  questioned.  But  an 
authority  so  valuable  as  that  of  Vice-President  Stephens, 
of  the  "  Confederate"  Government,  may  here  be  given. 

*  Says  M.  DE  TOCQUEVILLK,  in  his  Democracy  in  America  :  "  All  authority  origi 
nates  in  the  will  of  the  majority."  "  In  the  United  States,  the  majority  governs  in 
the  name  of  the  people,  as  is  the  case  in  all  the  countries  in  which  the  people  is 
supreme.'1  "  The  very  essence  of  democratic  government  consists  in  the  absolute 
sovereignty  of  the  majority.1'  '"The  moral  power  of  the  majority  is  founded  upon 
yet  another  principle,  which  is,  that  the  interests  of  the  many  are  to  bo  preferred 
to  those  of  the  few." 


4  CHARACTER    OF    THE    REBELLION. 

In  a  speech  at  Washington,  Georgia,  June  8,  1801,  he 
says  : — 

It  has  been  our  pride  that  out  of  the  seventy-two  years  of  the  ex 
istence  of  the  Government  under  the  Constitution,  it  has  been  for  sixty 
under  the  control  of  Southern  statesmen.  This  has  secured  whatever 
of  prosperity  and  greatness,  growth  and  development,  has  marked  the 
country's  career  during  its  past  history.  The  Northern  masses  gener 
ally  agreed  with  Southern  statesmen  in  their  policy,  and  sustained  them. 
These  were  the  democracy  of  that  section.  Mr.  Jefferson  said  they 
were  allies.  Washington's  administration  lasted  eight  years.  It  was 
Southern,  and  in  the  line  of  Southern  policy.  Then  came  the  elder 
Adams.  He  was  from  Massachusetts.  Opposite  ideas  shaped  his  poli 
cy.  At  the  end  of  four  years,  the  people  indignantly  turned  him  and 
his  counsellors  out  of  power.  Then  came  Jefferson,  Madison,  and  Mon 
roe,  each  eight  years — all  Southern  men.  Here  we  had  thirty-two 
years  of  Southern  administration  to  four  Northern.  Then  came  the 
younger  Adams  from  the  North.  He  was  the  great  embodiment  of 
those  ideas  which  now  control  Lincoln's  administration.  At  the  end  of 
four  years  he  was  turned  out  of  power,  and  Jackson,  a  Southern  man, 
came  in  for  eight  years.  Then  came  Van  Buren,  a  Northern  man,  for 
four  years.  Then  Harrison,  Tyler,  and  Polk,  which  added  eight  years 
more  of  Southern  coutrol.  Next,  Taylor  and  Eillmore.  Fillmore  was  a 
Northern  man,  it  is  true,  but  his  administration  was  sustained  by  the 
South,  and  so  was  Pierce's.  These  may  be  called  Southern  adminis 
trations  ;  and  so  was  Buchanan's — thus  making  sixty  out  of  the  seven 
ty-two  years  of  the  Government's  existence  under  the  Constitution.  All 
the  important  measures  which  have  marked  the  history  of  the  Govern 
ment,  which  have  made  it  what  it  is,  or  was  before  the  dismemberment, 
and  made  it  the  admiration  of  the  world,  were  the  fruits  of  the  policy  of 
Southern  statesmen. 

This  statement  of  Mr.  Stephens  requires  one  modifica 
tion.  The  policy  of  Mr.  Van  Buren's  administration  was 
as  intensely  Southern  as  that  of  any  one  he  claims.  It  was 
not  till  several  years  after  his  retirement  from  public  life 
that  he  gave  expression  to  those  views  which  rendered 
him  odious  to  his  quondam  Southern  friends.  The  balance 
may  then  be  adjusted  so  as  to  give  to  the  South,  upon  the 
principle  Mr.  Stephens  lays  down,  sixty-Jour  years  of  con- 


FALSE    CHARGES    BY    THE    SOUTH.  5 

trol  of  the  Government,  and  to  the  North  eight  years  ; 
and  that,  too,  while  the  North  had  a  large  majority  of  the 
population  of  the  country. 

Besides  thus  wielding  the  power  and  shaping  the  policy 
of  the  Government  from  its  origin,  the  party  of  which 
Mr.  Stephens  here  speaks  had  control  of  every  branch  of 
the  Government  when  the  revolt  began,  and  even  the  Ex 
ecutive  was  not  to  be  changed  for  a  period  of  four  months. 
From  this  state  of  facts,  it  seems  in  a  high  degree  probable, 
that,  had  this  powerful  party  remained  intact,  and  had  its 
Southern  leaders  exercised  only  a  modicum  of  that  saga 
city  which  had  characterized  them  in  its  better  days,  it 
could  have  secured  for  the  South  all  that  the  South  had  a 
right  to  demand  under  the  Constitution,  and  saved  the  land 
from  a  deluge  of  blood.  But  the  instigators  of  this  rebel 
lion  wantonly  threw  away  the  power  which  they  possessed, 
to  grasp  a  shadow  which  their  ambition  had  pictured. 

FALSE    CHARGES   BY   THE    SOUTH. 

3.  While  this  is  a  rebellion  against  the  Government 
proper,  it  was  instigated  against  an  incoming  Adminis 
tration  on  false  grounds. 

It  was  charged  at  the  outset  throughout  the  South,  that 
it  was  to  be  the  policy  of  Mr.  Lincoln's  Administration  to 
destroy  slavery.  This  charge  was  known  and  proven  to 
be  false  in  every  possible  way  which  the  case  admitted. 
It  was  denied  in  the  most  formal  manner  in  the  platform 
of  the  party,  adopted  in  the  National  Convention  by 
which  the  present  Executive  was  nominated.  It  was 
denied  by  many  of  the  leading  men  of  the  party,  in  their 
numerous  speeches  during  the  canvass,  and  by  the  resolu 
tions  of  many  assemblages  of  the  people ;  and  if  there 
were  any  contrary  declarations  they  were  wholly  without 
authority,  in  the  face  of  the  formal  announcement  of  the 


6  CHARACTER    OF    THE    REBELLION. 

National  Convention.  And  finally,  it  was  denied  by  the 
President  in  his  Inaugural  Address.*  In  short,  it  would 
seem  to  be  impossible  to  meet  such  a  charge  in  any  way 
in  which  it  was  not  met.  And  yet,  the  revolt  began  im 
mediately  upon  the  result  of  the  Presidential  election 

*  The  following  is  an  extract  from  the  Inaugural  Address  of  President  Lincoln,  in 
which  is  embodied  the  resolution  above  referred  to  from  the  platform  of  the  National 
Convention:  "I  do  not  consider  it  necessary,  at  present,  for  me  to  discuss  those 
matters  of  administration  about  which  there  is  no  special  anxiety  or  excitement. 
Apprehension  seems  to  exist  among  the  people  of  the  Southern  States,  that  by  the  ac 
cession  of  a  Republican  Administration,  their  property  and  their  peace  and  personal 
security  are  to  be  endangered.  There  never  has  been  any  reasonable  cause  for  such 
apprehension.  Indeed,  the  most  ample  evidence  to  the  contrary  has  all  the  while  exist 
ed,  and  been  open  to  their  inspection.  It  is  found  in  nearly  all  the  published  speeches 
of  him  who  now  addresses  you.  I  do  but  quote  from  one  of  those  speeches,  when  I 
declare  that  'I  have  no  purpose,  directly  or  indirectly,  to  interfere  with  the  institu 
tion  of  slavery  in  the  States  where  it  exists.1  I  believe  I  have  no  lawful  right  to  do  so ; 
and  I  have  no  inclination  to  do  so.'  Those  who  nominated  and  elected  me,  did  so  with 
the  full  knowledge  that  I  had  made  this,  and  made  similar  declarations,  and  had  never 
recanted  them.  And  more  than  this,  they  placed  in  the  platform,  for  my  acceptance, 
and  as  a  law  to  themselves  and  to  me,  the  clear  and  emphatic  resolution  which  I  now 
read :  '  Resolved^  That  the  maintenance  inviolate  of  the  rights  of  the  States,  and 
especially  the  right  of  each  State  to  order  and  control  its  own  domestic  institutions 
according  to  its  own  judgment  exclusively,  is  essential  to  that  balance  of  power  on 
which  the  perfection  and  endurance  of  our  political  fabric  depend;  and  we  de 
nounce  the  lawless  invasion  by  armed  force  of  the  soil  of  any  State  or  Territory, 
no  matter  under  what  pretext,  as  among  the  grossest  of  crimes.'  I  now  reiterate 
these  sentiments;  and  in  doing  so  I  only  press  upon  the  public  attention  the  most 
conclusive  evidence  of  which  the  case  is  susceptible,  that  the  property,  peace,  and 
security  of  no  section  are  to  be  in  any  wise  endangered  by  the  now  incoming  Ad 
ministration.  I  add,  too,  that  all  the  protection  which,  consistently  with  the  Con 
stitution  and  the  laws,  can  be  given,  will  be  cheerfully  given  to  all  the  States  when 
lawfully  demanded,  for  whatever  cause,  as  cheerfully  to  one  section  as  to  another." 
The  foregoing  sentences  completely  disprove  the  charge  under  consideration.  The 
President  closed  his  Address  as  follows:  "In  your  hands,  my  dissatisfied  fellow, 
countrymen,  and  not;  in  mine,  is  the  momentous  issue  of  civil  war.  The  Govern 
ment  will  not  assail  you.  You  can  have  no  conflict  without  being  yourselves  the 
aggi-essors.  You  have  no  oath  registered  in  heaven  to  destroy  the  Government; 
while  I  shall  have  the  most  solemn  one  to  'preserve,  protect,  and  defend  it.1  1  am 
loath  to  close.  We  are  not  enemies,  but  friends.  We  must  not  be  enemies.  Though 
passion  may  have  strained,  it  must  not  break  our  bonds  of  affection.  The  mystic 
chords  of  memory,  stretching  from  every  battle-Held  and  patriot  grave  to  every 
living  heart  and  hearthstone  all  over  tins  broad  land,  will  yet  swell  the  chorus  of 
the  Union,  when  again  touched,  as  surely  they  will  be,  by  the  better  angels  of  our 
nature." 


AGAINST    ALL   MEASURES    FOR    PEACE.  7 

(Nov.  6,  1860)  becoming  known,  and  four  months  before 
the  Administration  was  to  assume  power,  in  those  acts  of 
secret  and  open  aggression  upon  the  public  authority  and 
property  throughout  the  Southern  States,  with  which  the 
world  is  so  familiar. 

The  third  item,  therefore,  which  characterizes  the  rebel 
lion,  is,  that  it  began  with  a  most  barefaced  and  palpable 
lie  in  its  right  hand,  forged  by  the  leaders  against  the 
sovereign  people  of  the  United  States,  in  the  face  of  the 
most  public  and  indisputable  facts  to  the  contrary,  and 
employed  as  a  rallying  cry  to  deceive  the  masses  at  the 
South  and  precipitate  the  States  into  secession. 

It  cannot  be  said,  in  answer  to  this,  that  the  event  has 
proved  the  charge  true  ;  that  the  present  policy  of  the  Ad 
ministration  towards  slavery  shows  that  it  was  from  the 
first  its  design  to  destroy  it.  There  is  no  shadow  of  evi 
dence  that  the  President,  or  the  party  that  elected  him, 
intended  originally  to  interfere  with  it  in  the  States,  but 
overwhelming  proof  to  the  contrary.  But  when  open  war 
was  made  in  the  interest  of  slavery,  to  supplant  the  Gov 
ernment  and  dismember  the  Union,  the  whole  case  was 
changed ;  and  as,  on  the  one  hand,  the  rebels  did  not  enter 
upon  the  war  to  prove  their  prediction  true,  so,  on  the 
other,  the  Administration  were  not  bound  to  abstain  from 
touching  slavery  in  order  to  prove  the  prediction  false. 

AGAINST  ALL  MEASURES  FOE  PEACE. 

4.  After  the  rebellion  began,  it  was  persistently  adhered 
to  and  prosecuted,  in  spite  of  the  most  urgent  means  to 
preserve  peace,  made  by  the  party  which  had  triumphed  in 
the  Presidential  election,  and  by  many  of  the  patriotic  of 
all  parties. 

Among  other  important  measures  which  were  taken 
during  the  winter  and  prior  to  the  fourth  of  March,  1881, 


CHARACTER    OF   THE    REBELLION. 

while  President  Buchanan  was  still  in  power,  were  three 
which  deserve  special  notice :  The  Acts  of  the  Peace  Con 
vention,  as  it  was  called;  the  proposed  Amendment  to  the 
Constitution  from  the  Committee  of  Thirty-Three  of  the 
House  of  Representatives ;  and  the  organization  of  the 
Territories. 

The  Peace  Convention  met  in  Washington  in  January, 
1861,  and  continued  in  session  several  weeks.  It  was  con 
vened  on  the  recommendation  of  the  Legislature  of  Vir 
ginia,  and  composed  of  delegates  from  thirteen  free  States, 
and  seven  slave  States ;  to  devise  measures  which  should 
be  recommended  to  Congress  for  its  adoption,  in  order  to 
harmonize  the  views  of  the  two  sections  of  the  country 
and  prevent  bloodshed.  It  embraced  many  of  the  ablest 
men  of  the  country,  of  the  different  shades  of  political 
opinion  in  each  State  represented.  Although  it  was  a  body 
of  no  legal  authority,  yet  from  the  weight  of  character  of 
the  men  composing  it,  presided  over  by  one  who  had  filled 
the  office  of  President  of  the  United  States,  and  from  its 
humane  and  patriotic  objects,  its  proceedings  were  watched 
with  intense  interest. 

As  the  result  of  its  deliberations,  this  Convention  pre 
sented  to  Congress  the  recommendation  of  an  article  for 
an  amendment  to  the  Constitution,  consisting  of  seven 
sections.  As  the  questions  which  divided  the  country 
related  mainly  to  slavery,  the  provisions  of  this  proposed 
article  were  framed  with  special  reference  to  that  subject. 
Among  them  were  the  following,  some  of  which  were 
made  apparently  to  the  demands  and  others  to  the  fears 
of  the  party  in  revolt,  and  nearly  all  of  which  were  most 
marked  concessions  to  the  whole  South.  The  article 
restored  the  Missouri  Compromise  line,  .with  very  serious 
modifications,  on  the  parallel  of  latitude  of  36°  30'.  It 
admitted  slavery  into  "all  the  territory"  south  of  that 


AGAINST   ALL    MEASURES   FOR   PEACE.  9 

line,  guaranteeing  that  the  status  of  slaves  then  within  it 
should  "  not  be  changed,"  and  prohibiting  Congress  and 
the  Territorial  Legislature  from  passing  any  law  against 
taking  slaves  into  such  territory.  It  guaranteed  the  admis 
sion  of  States  into  the  Union  from  "any  Territory  North 
or  South  of  said  line,"  either  with  or  without  slavery,  as 
the  Constitution  of  each  State  should  provide.  It  pro 
hibited  such  a  construction  of  the  Constitution  as  would 
give  to  Congress  any  power  whatever  over  slavery  in  any 
of  the  States ;  or  to  abolish  slavery  in  the  District  of 
Columbia  without  the  consent  of  Maryland,  and  without 
the  consent  or  compensation  of  the  owners ;  or  to  prevent 
any  one  from  taking  his  slaves  to  and  from  the  District  of 
Columbia  at  pleasure ;  or  to  interfere  with  or  abolish  sla 
very  in  any  place,  either  in  State  or  Territory,  "  under  the 
exclusive  jurisdiction  of  the  United  States;"  or  to  inter 
fere  with  the  domestic  slave-trade  between  the  slave 
States.  It  also  prohibited  such  a  construction  of  the  Con 
stitution  as  would  "  prevent  any  of  the  States,"  so  dis 
posed,  "from  enforcing  the  delivery  of  fugitives  from 
labor"  to  their  owners ;  and  made  it  obligatory  upon  Con 
gress  to  "  provide  by  law  that  the  United  States  shall  pay 
to  the  owner  the  full  value  of  his  fugitive  from  labor  in  all 
cases"  where  fugitive  slaves  should  be  prevented  from 
arrest  or  rescued  from  the  officers  of  the  law  "  by  violence 
or  intimidation  from  mobs  or  riotous  assemblages."  And 
finally,  it  provided  that  the  sections  embodying  these  sev 
eral  guarantees  and  prohibitions  (with  two  minor  excep 
tions),  together  with  the  several  parts  of  the  Constitution 
which  now  relate  to  slavery,  should  "not  be  amended  or 
abolished,  WITHOUT  THE  CONSENT  OF  ALL  THE  STATES."  A 
majority  of  "three-fourths"  only  of  the  States  is  now 
requisite  for  amending  any  part  of  the  Constitution. 
It  is  perceived  at  a  glance  that  these  propositions  of  the 
]* 


10  CHARACTER    OF    THE    REBELLION. 

Peace  Convention  made  concessions  to  the  whole  South  in 
several  important  particulars.  The  only  question  touching 
slavery  which  was  brought  into  the  Presidential  canvass 
of  1860,  was  that  concerning  the  Territories,  over  which 
Congress  has  full  jurisdiction;  and  the  result  of  the  elec 
tion  was  deemed  a  solemn  judgment  by  the  people  that 
the  Territories  then  free  should  remain  free.  This  was 
simply  in  accordance  with  a  principle  which  Congress  had 
recognized  several  times  in  our  history,  by  prohibiting  sla 
very  in  portions  of  the  territory  of  the  United  States,  and 
these  prohibitions  had  been  sanctioned  as  constitutional  by 
Southern  Presidents  and  by  the  general  acquiescence  of 
all  political  parties.*  But  after  the  revolt  commenced,  and 


*  Including  the  action  of  the  Continental  Congress  under  the  Articles  of  Confede 
ration,  and  the  several  acts  of  Congress  under  the  present  Constitution,  then-  has 
been  direct  legislation  many  times,  prohibitory  of  or  interfering  with  slavery  in  tho 
Territorial  domain  under  the  immediate  jurisdiction  of  the  Government  of  the 
United  States,  between  that  earlier  period  and  the  administration  of  President 
Polk.  The  Continental  Congress  passed  the  famous  "Ordinance  for  the  Govern 
ment  of  the  Territory  of  the  United  States  Northwest  of  the  Ohio  River,"  July  13, 
"*  787.  Eight  States  were  represented,  and  voted  on  this  Ordinance,  three  of  which 
<r?re  free  at  the  beginning  of  the  rebellion,  and  five  were  slave,  each  State  having 
on<  r?te,  viz. :  Free  States,  Massachusetts,  New  York,  and  New  Jersey  ;  Slave  States, 
Delaware,  Virginia,  North  Carolina,  South  Carolina,  and  Georgia.  Every  one  of 
these  States  voted  for  this  Ordinance,  prohibiting  slavery,  and  also  every  mem 
ber  but  one,  Mr.  Tates,  of  New  York.  The  Constitution  of  the  United  States  was 
adopted  in  the  same  year,  and  in  the  Convention  which  framed  it  were  several  of  the 
same  men  who  in  the  Continental  Congress  passed  this  Ordinance.  One  of  the  ear 
liest  acts  of  the  First  Congress  passed  under  the  Constitution  and  during  the  admin 
istration  of  General  Washington  as  President,  embracing  again  several  men  who  had 
been  in  the  Convention  that  framed  the  Constitution,  was  an  act  to  enforce  the 
Ordinance  of  17S7,  exeluding.slavcry  from  the  Northwest  Territory ;  and  in  doing 
this,  the  fathers  who  had  made  the  Constitution  so  recently  did  not  of  course  sup 
pose  they  were  violating  it.  Whatever  else,  therefore,  may  be  said  about  this  Ordi 
nance  and  the  Act  of  Congress  last  referred  to,  and  whatever  else  they  may  havo 
included  or  covered,  it  is  clear  that  they  prohibited  slavery  in  United  States  Ter 
ritory;  and  they  so  far  forth  show  that,  in  the  judgment  of  the  men  who  understood 
the  real  intent  and  meaning  of  the  Constitution  as  well  probably  as  any  men  who 
have  since  lived,  it  is  perfectly  within  the  power  of  Congress  to  prohibit  slavery  in 
any  Territory  of  the  United  States  whenever  in  its  opinion  public  policy  demands 
it  Nor  has  the  exercise  of  such  power  been  pronounced  an  infraction  of  the  Con 
stitution  by  the  Supreme  Court,  or  been  so  deemed  by  any  class  of  public  men  (and 


AGAINST    ALL   MEASURES    FOK   PEACE.  11 

solely  for  the  sake  of  preventing  bloodshed,  the  Peace 
Convention,  in  which  were  some  of  the  leading  men  of  the 
triumphant  party,  presented  to  Congress  for  adoption  into 
the  Constitution,  the  foregoing  provisions,  which  would 
secure  greater  immunities  to  slavery  than  it  had  ever 
before  enjoyed. 

How  were  these  generous  proposals  received?  The 
leaders  of  the  rebellion  scouted  them  with  scorn.  Some 
of  them  publicly  declared, — as  in  the  case  of  the  Hon. 
Lawrence  M.  Keitt,  member  of  the  House  of  Represen 
tatives  from  South  Carolina, — that  if  a  blank  parchment 
were  given  them  on  which  to  write  the  demands  which  the 
North  should  grant,  they  would  reject  it  with  contempt. 
Mr.  Tyler,  the  President  of  the  Peace  Convention,  went 
home  to  Virginia,  and  with  other  leading  men  of  that 
State  used  all  his  influence  against  the  favorable  reception 
of  these  proposals  by  the  Legislature.  We  witnessed,  per 
sonally,  the  manner  in  which  these  propositions  were 
received  in  the  Senate  of  the  United  States.  On  being 
reported  from  the  committee  to  whom  they  had  been 
referred,  we  heard  five  speeches  made  upon  them  which 
consumed  the  chief  portion  of  one  day's  session.  Messrs. 
Mason  and  Hunter,  of  Virginia,  spoke  earnestly  against 


never  by  any  political  party),  until  within  a  very  recent  period.  The  last  instance 
in  the  series  of  Congressional  prohibitory  acts  now  referred  to,  occurred  as  late  as 
the  administration  of  James  K.  Polk,  a  Southern  President.  With  a  Democratic 
majority  in  both  Houses  of  Congress,  slavery  was  prohibited  in  the  bill  for  the 
organization  of  the  Territory  of  Oregon.  The  Southern  doctrine,  therefore,  that  the 
Constitution  carries  slavery  into  the  Territories  by  its  own  inherent  force,  and  that 
Congress  therefore  cannot  prohibit  but  is  bound  necessarily  "  to  protect11  it  there  by 
positive  law,  is  a  modern  notion — very  modern.  And  yet,  this  question  of  slavery 
in  the  Territories  was  made  a  chief  element  in  the  South  (see  next  chapter)  for  urg 
ing  the  people  into  rebellion.  Dr.  Thornwell  but  announces  the  new  doctrine  on 
this  point  upon  which  rebel  statesmen  and  the  whole  South  acted, — and  it  goes 
beyond  the  Territories  and  into  the  States,— when  he  says:  "The  Constitution 
covers  the  whole  territory  of  the  Union,  and  throughout  that  territory  has  taken 
slavery  under  the  protection  of  law." — Southern  Presbyterian  Review^  Jan.,  1861. 

2 


12  CHARACTER    OF   THE    REBELLION. 

them,  ,'is  did  also  Mr.  Pugh,  of  Ohio,  these  three  men 
being  of  the  party  in  the  Senate  having  the  majority ; 
while  their  adoption  was  earnestly  and  most  eloquently 
urged  by  Mr.  Crittenden,  of  Kentucky,  and  by  Mr.  Baker, 
of  California,  the  latter  being  of  the  Republican  party, 
and  showing  a  few  months  later,  in  the  unfortunate  battle 
at  Ball's  Bluif,  that  he  was  as  ready  to  pour  out  his  heart's 
blood  for  his  country,  when  the  clash  of  arms  had  actually 
come,  as  he  was  to  speak  eloquently  for  peace  as  long  as 
peace  was  possible. 

What  good  fruit  could  be  expected  from  the  labors  of 
the  Peace  Convention,  when  their  extreme  and  generous 
concessions  to  the  South  were  spurned  with  disdain  by  all 
those  who  controlled  Southern  opinion  ?* 

The  second  measure  to  which  we  have  referred,  was 
taken  in  the  same  spirit  which  actuated  the  Peace  Conven 
tion.  It  was  another  proposition  to  amend  the  Constitu 
tion,  emanating  from  the  Committee  of  Thirty-Three  of  the 
House  of  Representatives,  of  which  Mr.  Corwin,  of  Ohio,  a 

*  The  late  Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  Hon.  Salmon  P.  Chase,  was  a  member  of  this 
Peace  Convention.  On  visiting  his  home  in  Ohio,  in  October  last,  addressing  bis 
fellow-citizens  in  Columbus  and  again  in  Cincinnati,  he  incidentally  refers  to  the 
labors  of  this  Convention,  as  follows :  "  When  he  left  the  State,  it  had  been  at  the 
invitation  and  appointment  of  his  friend  and  most  honored  successor  (Governor  Den- 
nison),  a  Governor,  he  must  here  take  the  opportunity  to  say,  who  had  worthily  dis 
charged  the  great  trusts  the  people  had  confided  to  his  hands.  In  the  Peace  Confer 
ence,  to  which  he  had  thus  been  appointed,  he  and  his  Northern  colleagues  had  been 
animated  by  the  sincerest  and  most  anxious  desire  to  preserve  the  peace  and  har 
mony  of  the  Republic.  They  had  no  wish  save  to  give  effect  to  the  Constitution 
and  laws  as  they  stood.  They  had  assured  the  delegates  from  the  South  that  if  they 
would  be  content  with  slavery  where  it  was,  there  was  no  considerable  body  of  men 
anywhere  who  sought  to  interfere  with  them.  Join  us,  then, — they  had  proposed, — 
in  assuring  your  people  of  this  plain,  indisputable  fact,  and  allay  this  dangerous  ex 
citement.  Then  call  for  a  National  Convention  and  let  the  whole  country  decide  on 
the  new  claims  you  prefer.  But  for  that  fair,  simple  proposition,  not  one  single  vote 
from  a  single  slaveliolding  State  was  recorded.  John  Tyler  was  the  Chairman  of 
that  Convention.  Mr.  Seddon,  the  presert  rebel  Minister  of  War,  and  nearly  every 
other  member  from  the  South,  was  now  identified  with  the  rebellion.  They  did  not 
consent  to  the  proposition,  because  they  had  made  up  their  minds  before  they  entered 
the  Convention, to  rule  the  nation  or  ruin  it"— Cincinnati  Gazette,  Oct.  13, 1863, 


AGAINST  ALL  MEASURES  FOE  PEACE.          13 

leading  member  of  the  Republican  party,  was  the  Chair 
man.  It  was  in  these  words  :  "  No  amendment  shall  be 
made  to  the  Constitution  which  will  authorize  or  give 
Congress  power  to  abolish  or  interfere,  in  any  State,  with 
the  domestic  institutions  thereof,  including  that  of  persons 
held  to  labor  or  servitude  by  the  laws  of  said  State." 

This  proposed  amendment  was  intended  to  meet  the  spe 
cific  charge,  made  all  through  the  South  during  the  Presi 
dential  canvass,  that  the  Republican  party  designed  to  in 
terfere  with  slavery  in  the  States.  It  was  indeed  a  work 
of  supererogation,  for  no  statesman  of  any  party  had  ever 
pretended  that  Congress  had  any  such  power  as  it  was 
proposed  here  to  restrict.  .  But  it  shows  how  earnest  were 
the  national  authorities  to  promote  concord  between  the 
North  and  the  South.  This  measure  passed  both  branches 
of  Congress  by  the  requisite  majority  of  two-thirds,  and  in 
deed  almost  unanimously.  It  is  highly  probable  that  it 
would  have  been  passed  by  the  required  number  of  the 
States,  had  not  the  violent  measures  of  those  in  rebellion 
soon  revealed  that  a  prevention  of  actual  hostilities  was 
hopeless.* 

The  third  measure  showing  a  disposition  to  remove  all 
causes  of  complaint  as  far  as  possible,  is  seen  in  the  action 
of  Congress  upon  the  organization  of  Territories.  As  be 
fore  stated,  the  only  question  touching  slavery  upon  which 
the  Presidential  election  turned,  was  concerning  its  status 
in  the  Territories.  Congress,  before  its  close  on  the  4th 


*  To  this  proposition  to  amend  the  Constitution,  President  Lincoln  referred  in  his 
Inaugural  Address,  as  follows:  "I  understand  that  a  proposed  amendment  to  the 
Constitution  (which  amendment,  however,  I  have  not  seen)  has  passed  Congress,  to 
the  effect  that  the  Federal  Government  shall  never  interfere  with  the  domestic  insti 
tutions  of  the  States,  including  that  of  persons  held  to  service.  To  avoid  miscon 
struction  of  what  I  have  said,  I  depart  from  my  purpose  not  to  speak  of  particular 
amendments,  so  far  as  to  say,  that,  holding  such  a  provision  to  be  now  implied  con 
stitutional  law,  I  have  no  objections  to  its  being  made  express  and  irrevocable." 


14  CHARACTER    OF    TIIE    REBELLION. 

of  March,  1861,  organized  several  Territorial  Governments 
for  the  remaining  portion  of  the  public  domain.  But  in 
stead  of  ingrafting  upon  these  bills  any  prohibition  of 
slavery  in  these  Territories, — which  they  had  the  power  of 
numbers  to  do  after  the  withdrawal  of  the  Southern  mem 
bers,  as  well  as  the  authority  of  many  precedents  by  Con 
gress  from  the  earliest  period,  and  which  would  have  been 
in  accordance  with  the  sentiments  of  the  people  expressed 
in  the  election, — the  whole  question  was  left  open  to  the 
decision  of  the  people  in  each  Territory  when  they  should 
form  their  respective  State  Constitutions  ;  thus  practically 
allowing  to  the  South  all  that  had  been  yielded  by  the 
decision  of  the  Supreme  Court  in  the  Dred  Scott  case,  that 
they  might  go  to  the  Territories  with  their  slaves,  and 
abide  the  decision  of  the  people  whether  they  should  be 
ultimately  free  or  slave  States.* 

When  such  advances  were  made  to  the  party  then  in 
revolt,  and  when  they  were  met  in  the  well-known  manner 
indicated,  no  seer  was  needed  to  predict  the  result.  In 
the  words  of  the  Hon.  Edward  Everett,  the  leaders  of  the 
rebellion  "  were  resolved  not  to  be  satisfied."  They  looked 
with  proud  contempt  upon  the  men  who  endeavored  to 
conciliate  them,  and  regarded  their  most  generous  conces 
sions  as  prompted  by  pusillanimity  and  cowardice.  They 
believed  that  a  people  who  could  so  act  would  not  fight 
when  the  trial  of  arms  should  come— a  mistake  of  which 
they  have  since  had  ample  proof. 

This  characteristic  of  the  rebellion  thus  exhibits  the  most 
indubitable  evidence, — and  it  is  furnished  in  many  other 

*  In  an  account  of  a  public  meeting  held  at  Louisville,  Kentucky,  the  Louisvillo 
Journal  of  the  next  day,  April  21,  1861,  says  :  "  The  Hon.  John  Brown  Young  fol 
lowed  in  a  speech  unsurpassed  in  power  and  brilliancy.  This  gifted  young  orator 
rehearsed  the  history  of  the  last  Congress,  the  efforts  for  compromise,  the  surrender 
by  the  Republican*  of  the  fundamental  idea  of  the,  Chicago  Platform,  in  the  posi 
tive  non-extension  of  Slavery  in  the  formation  of  the  new  Territories.'1'' 


AGAINST  ALL  MEASURES  FOR  PEACE.         15 

public  facts, — that  while  the  people  of  the  North,  repre 
sented  by  their  leaders,  were  disposed  to  go  to  extreme 
lengths  in  preserving  peace,  the  leaders  of  the  rebellion 
were  as  persistently  determined,  in  the  face  of  these  over 
tures,  to  brave  all  the  hazards  and  horrors  of  civil  war  to 
carry  out  their  foregone  purposes.* 

*0ne  of  the  most  thorough  specimens  of  sympathy  with  the  South  which  we  have 
met  with  in  Northern  literature,  from  a  respectable  source,  since  the  beginning  of 
the  rebellion,  is  a  pamphlet  of  thirty-two  pages  from  the  pen  of  Eev.  Samuel  J. 
Baird,  D.D.,  of  New  Jersey,  entitled  "Southern  Eights  and  Northern  Duties  in  the 
Present  Crisis.1'  It  is  in  the  form  of  a  Letter,  dated  February  6,  1861,  to  the  Hon. 
William  Pennington,  then  Speaker  of  the  House  of  Representatives  of  the  United 
States.  Dr.  Baird  says:  "  When  a  free,  enlightened,  and  Christian  people,— and  such 
are  our  Southern  brethren, — are  induced  to  peril  all,  to  rend  the  ties  which  have; 
hitherto  held  them,  or  even  to  hesitate  upon  venturing  the  fearful  experiment  of 
revolution,  the  causes  must  be  such  as  stand  justified  to  conscience,  and  appeal  to  the 
highest  principk-8  of  our  nature.  Either  they  are  victims  of  a  gigantic  fraud,  or  1  hey 
labor  under  grievances  of  the  most  serious  nature.  Upon  either  alternative,  their 
position  is  entitled  to  profound  respect,  generous  forbearance,  and  anxious  study  to 
discover  and  expose  the  fraud  if  they  have  been  deceived,  or  to  rectify  the  wrong  if 
they  are  the  subjects  of  real  grievance;  by  any  honorable  means  to  allay  their  anxie 
ties  and  restore  the  Union."  It  is  very  clear,  from  the  whole  pamphlet,  that  he 
deems  the  South  the  injured  party,  and  most  grievously  wronged ;  and  the  chief 
responsibility  is  laid  at  the  door  of  the  "  Republican  party"  which  put  Mr.  Lincoln 
into  office,  whose  'attitude"1  he  is  led  to  "examine  more  particularly,"  "because  the 
power  is  in  their  hands  at  this  momentous  crisis."  Hence  he  criticizes  their  platform 
and  condemns  their  principles  and  general  course,  and  in  these  finds  justification  or 
palliatives  for  the  South.  Here  is  a  specimen:  "So  long,  in  a  word,  as  the  repre 
sentatives  of  a  great  party,  professing  to  reflect  the  sentiments  and  act  in  the  name 
of  the  North,  form  intrenchments  around  the  Southern  States,  with  the  avowed  pur 
pose  of  arresting  their  further  expansion,  it  is  in  vain  to  deny  that  the  South  has  the 
most  grave  and  momentous  cause  of  apprehension.  *  *  *  It  may  be  our  duty  to 
treat  the  institutions  of  the  South  as  a  crime,  and  themselves  as  enemies,  to  be  sur 
rounded  and  kept  in  subjection.  Upon  that  question  I  now  say  nothing.  But, 
manifestly,  the  alternative  is,  that  all  this  is  wrong,  and  an  aggression  which  the 
South  ought  not  to  suffer ;  or  that  if  right,  in  absolving  us  from  the  obligations  to 
the  South  which  have  been  heretofore  recognized,  it  releases  the  latter  from  alle 
giance,  to  the  Union:"1  Further  on,  Dr.  Baird  says:  "My  single  object  has  been,  to 
bear  a  testimony  to  the  claims  of  justice  against  us  on  her  behalf— to  expose  the 
assumption  that  it  is  our  peculiar  prerogative,  as  guardians  of  the  Territories,  to 
protect  them  from  the  crime  and  curse  of  our  Southern  brethren.  To  this  purpose, 
it  has  been  shown  that  the  South  has  just  cause  of  grievance  of  the  most  serious 
character,  which  demands  prompt  and  i'Jieerful  redress  at  our  hands;  and  rights 
in  the  Territories,  which  neither  in  honor  nor  honesty  may  we  disregard."  Again : 
"Our  first  and  imperative  duty,  in  faithfulness  to  our  covenants  and  to  the  claims  of 


16  CHARACTER    OF   THE    REBELLIOX. 


PERPETRATED    BY    FRAUD    AND    VIOLENCE. 

5.  The  rebellion  was  carried  through  the  forms  of  seces 
sion,  in  many  of  the  States,  by  fraud  and  violence,  against 
the  wishes,  and  in  some  against  the  direct  vote,  of  a 
majority  of  the  people. 

The  facts  which  illustrate  this  are  voluminous,  and 
generally  well  known.  We  are  compelled  to  glance  at 
them  briefly,  and  can  refer  to  a  few  palpable  cases  only. 

The  popular  vote  of  Louisiana  upon  the  ordinance  of 
secession  was  never  officially  made  public.  It  was  charged 
by  the  New  Orleans  papers  at  the  time  as  being  largely 
against  secession,  and  the  officers  of  the  Convention  were 
challenged  to  proclaim  the  result.  To  this  day  that  duty 
has  never  been  performed  by  them,  while  there  is  the  most 
unquestionable  evidence  that  the  State  was  forced  into 

honor  and  justice,  is  to  accord  to  the  South  any  necessary  protection  against  the 
piratical  policy  of  abolitionism,  and  a  distinct  recognition  of  her  riff  Ms  in  the  Terri 
tories  of  the  United  States."  What,  then,  does  Dr.  Baird  wish  to  have  done,  and  by 
whom  ?  He  would  probably  have  had  Congress,  when  assembled  in  December,  I860 
immediately  get  down  on  its  knees  and  beg  the  South's  pardon  that  the  people  had 
elected  Mr.  Lincoln,  even  when  that  Congress  had  a  Democratic  majority  in  both 
Houses.  Hear  him :  "No  one  capable  of  forming  an  intelligent  judgment  on  the 
subject,  can  look  over  the  progress  of  events  at  the  South,  and  the  results  thus  far, 
and  doubt  that  had  Congress,  at  the  opening  of  the  present  session,  PROMPTLY  shown 
a  spirit  of  magnanimous  patriotism,  such  as  was  so  eminently  becoming  from  the 
stronger  to  the  weaker,  and  which  the  circumstances  so  clearly  demanded,  tho  tide 
of  secession  would  have  been  stayed  on  the  borders  of  South  Carolina ;  and  that  State 
would  soon  have  returned  to  her  place  in  our  midst."  We  have  shown  what  measures 
for  "peace"  Congress  did  actually  propose  when  that  Democratic  majority  had  been 
reduced  to  a  minority  by  the  withdrawal  of  the  Southern  members.  Dr.  Baird, 
nevertheless,  mourns  over  "Congressional  inactivity,"  and  denounces  "the  treach 
erous  passivity  of  the  present  session."  It  is  but  just  to  suppose,  however,  that  he 
would  not  have  belabored  Congress  in  exactly  that  style,  had  the  proceedings  of  the 
whole  session  been  before  him  at  the  time  he  wrote  ;  especially  when,  at  the  opening, 
his  friends  were  in  the  majority.  But  after  making  allowance  for  this,  the  character 
of  his  pamphlet  is  such,  throughout,  that,  although  by  no  means  as  we  suppose  so 
intended, it  was  well  calculated  and  unquestionably  did  give  "aid  and  comfort"  to 
the  rebellion,  both  among  those  who  were  then  and  long  before  had  been  mustering 
and  arming  soldiers  for  the  overthrow  of  the  Government,  and  their  hearty  sympa 
thizers  all  through  the  North. 


PERPETRATED    BY    FRAUD    AND    VIOLENCE.  17 

secession  against  the  direct  vote  of  a  majority  of  the 
people. 

Governor  Hamilton,  of  Texas,  in  an  address  to  the  peo 
ple  of  that  State  in  January  last,  not  going  into  any  proof 
of  the  fact,  but  incidentally  referring  to  what  those  whom  he 
was  addressing  well  knew  to  be  true,  says  :  "  When  you 
were  forced,  by  a  minority,  into  rebellion,  you  were  in  the 
enjoyment  of  every  blessing  ever  conferred  by  civil  govern 
ment  upon  men." 

Virginia,  Tennessee,  and  North  Carolina,  were  carried 
into  secession  by  violence  and  terror,  as  many  of  their 
own  newspapers  and  public  men  at  the  time  declared. 
Proof  of  this  which  we  have  in  possession  would  fill  many 
pages.  In  some  States,  the  whole  work  was  done  by  a 
Convention,  or  by  the  State  Legislature,  without  the  voice 
of  the  people  taken  upon  the  ordinance  of  secession ;  in 
others,  the  submission  of  the  question  to  a  popular  vote 
was  but  a  burlesque  on  the  elective  franchise.  We  men 
tion  facts  which  are  too  recent  and  too  familiar  to  be 
doubted,  and  only  refer  to  them  to  exhibit  another  of  the 
striking  characteristics  of  the  rebellion. 

A  single  testimony,  chiefly  concerning  the  manner  in 
which  Virginia  was  carried  "  out  of  the  Union,"  will  serve 
as  an  example  of  other  cases.  It  is  furnished  by  a  dis 
tinguished  Southern  statesman  who  was  familiar  with  the 
scenes  he  describes: 

In  these  circumstances  was  the  peaceful  process  of  secession  set  on 
foot,  and  the  deceived  masses  of  the  Southern  States  stimulated  into 
that  unnatural  frenzy  which  wildly  hurried  them  into  a  treason  from 
which  retreat  soon  became  impossible.  When  this  drama  of  secession 
came  to  the  stage  of  its  formal  enactment  in  the  passage  of  secession 
ordinances,  it  was  characterized  by  frauds  only  more  stupendous  than 
those  I  have  described,  because  they  implicated  a  greater  number  of 
actors  and  spread  over  a  wider  surface.  Whilst  some  of  the  States, 
perhaps  a  majority  of  them,  were  in  earnest  in  their  resolve  to  secede 


18  CHARACTER    OF   THE    KEBELLIOX. 

the  most  important  States  were  not ;  and  if  the  people  in  these  had 
been  left  to  the  free  expression  of  their  wish  they  would  have  refused. 
The  Convention  of  Virginia  had  been  elected  by  a  vote  which  was 
largely  against   secession,  and  the  Legislature  which  authorized  that 
Convention  had  taken  care  to  provide  that  no  ordinance  of  secession 
should  have  any  effect  unless  ratified  by  a  subsequent  expression  of  tho 
popular  will  in  the  regular  election.     When  the  Convention  assembled 
at  Richmond,  there  was  a  majority  of  its  members  opposed  to  the  ordi 
nance.     The  scenes  that  were  enacted  in  the  sequence  of  the  proceed 
ings,   by  which  that  majority  was  reduced  to   a  minority,    are  only 
partially  known  to  the  country.     "\Vhilst  the  sessions  were  open  to  the 
public  observation  the  majority  held  its  ground,  but  amidst  what  perils 
and  appliances,  every  inhabitant  of  Richmond  at  that  time  knows.     The 
best  men  of  the  State,  and  there  were  many,  who  had  dared  to  speak 
in  the  Convention  in  favor  of  the  Union,  were  exposed  to  the  grossest 
insults  from  the  mob  that  filled  the  lobbies,  and  by  whom  they  were 
pursued  with  hootings  and  threats  to  their  own  dwellings.     Still,  no 
vote  could  be  got  sufficient  to  carry  the  ordinance.     The  Convention 
then  resolved  to  exclude  the  public  and  manage  their  work  in  secret 
session.     From  that  day  affairs  took  a  new  turn.     The  community  of 
Richmond  was  filled  with  strife.     The  friends  of  the  Union,  both  in  the 
Convention  and  out  of  it, — a  large  number  of  persons, — were  plunged 
into  the  deepest  anxiety  and  alarm.     They  felt  that  the  cause  was  lost 
and  that  the  sentiment  of  the  majority  of  the  State  would  be  overruled. 
Quarrels  arose.      Ardent  and   reckless   men   were   distempered   with 
passion.     It  was  no  longer  safe  to  discuss  the  subject  of  the  day  in  the 
streets.     The  hotels  were  -filled  with  strangers,  loud,  peremptory,  and 
fierce.     A  friend  of  the  Union  could  not  mingle  in  these  crowds  with 
out  certainty  of  insult,  nor  even  sometimes  without  danger  of  personal 
violence.     The  recusant   members  of  the  Convention  were  plied  with 
every  expedient  to  enforce  their  submission.      The  weak  were  derided, 
the  timid  bullied,  the   wavering  cajoled  with  false  promises  and  false 
representations  of  the  state  of  opinion  in  the  country.      Those  who 
could  not  be  reached  by  these  arguments,  but  who  were  found  pliable 
to  more  genial  impulses,  were  assailed  by  flattery,  by  the  influences  of 
friendship,  by  the  blandishments  of  the  dinner-table,  and  finally  carried 
away  by  the  wild  enthusiasm  of  midnight  revelry.     If  the  Convention 
had  sat  in  Staunton  or  Fredericksburg, — anywhere  but  in  Richmond. — 
no  ordinance  of  secession  could  have  been  passed.     As  it  was,  it  was  n 
work  of  long  and  sinister  industry  to  bring  it  about.     It,  became  ncccs- 


PEKPETKATED    BY    FRAUD    AND   VIOLENCE.  19 

sary  to  fire  the  people  with  new  and  startling  sensations — to  craze  the 
public  mind  with  excitement.  To  this  end^  messages  were  sent  to 
Charleston  to  urge  the  bombardment  of  Sumter.  *  *  *  The  whole 
South  became  ablaze.  Men  lost  all  self-control,  and  were  ready  to  obey 
any  order.  The  vote  of  the  Convention  hod  been  canvassed  from  time 
to  time  during  this  process  of  ripening  the  mind  for  the  act  of  secession, 
and  it  was  now  found  that  it  might  be  successfully  put.  It  was  taken 
three  days  after  the  surrender  of  Fort  Sumter.  and  the  public  were 
told  that  it  was  carried  by  a  large  majority.  Subsequent  disclosures 
show  that  upwards  of  fifty  of  its  members  stood  firm  and  preserved  their 
equanimity  in  this  great  tempest  of  passion.  The  scene  at  the  taking 
of  the  vote  is  described  by  one  of  the  members  as  resembling  the  riot 
of  a  hospital  of  lunatics.  The  ratification  of  this  act  was  yet  to  be  gone 
through,  as  prescribed  by  the  law,  in  a  vote  of  the  people  to  be  taken 
in  May.  That  proceeding  was  substantially  ignored  in  ah1  that  fol 
lowed.  An  appointment  of  members  to  the  rebel  Congress  was  imme 
diately  made,  to  represent  the  State  in  the  Provisional  Government 
then  established  at  Montgomery.  The  President  of  the  new  Con 
federacy  was  forthwith  invited  to  send  an  army  into  the  State ;  and 
accordingly,  when  the  month  of  May  arrived,  troops  were  stationed  in 
all  those  counties  where  it  was  supposed  any  considerable  amount  of 
loyalty  to  the  Union  existed  amongst  the  people.  The  day  of  election 
appointed  for  the  ratification  found  this  force  stationed  at  the  polls,  and 
the  refractory  people  mastered  and  quelled  into  silence.  Union  men 
were  threatened  in  th  ;ir  lives  if  they  should  dare  to  vote  against  the 
ordinance  ;  and  an  influential  leader  in  the  movement,  but  recently  a 
Senator  of  the  United  States,  wrote  and  published  a  letter,  hinting  to 
those  who  might  be  rash  enough  to  vote  against  secession,  that  they 
must  expect  to  be  driven  out  of  the  State.*  Of  course,  the  ratification 

*  Reference  is  here  made  to  James  M.  Mason,  now  the  Rebel  Commissioner  to 
London.  His  letter  is  dated  "  Winchester,  Va.,  May  16,  1861,"  and  was  published 
in  the  Winchextei-  Virginian.  In  this  letter  he  says  :  "The  ordinance  of  secession 
withdrew  the  State  of  Virginia  from  the  Union,  with  all  the  consequences  resulting 
from  the  separation.  It  annulled  the  Constitution  and  the  laws  of  the  United 
States  within  the  limits  of  this  State,  and  absolved  the  citizens  of  Virginia  from  all 
obligations  and  obedience  to  them."  This  is  a  little  remarkable,  when  the  Conven 
tion  provided  that  the  ordinance  should  be  submitted  to  a  vote  of  the  people  of  the 
State.  But  we  see  from  another  paragraph  of  the  same  letter,  what  sort  of  an  elec 
tion  this  was  to  be  :  "  If  it  be  asked,  what  are  those  to  do  who  in  their  consciences 
cannot  vote  to  separate  Virginia  from  the  United  States,  the  answer  is  simple  and 
plain :  honor  and  duty  alike  require  that  they  should  not  vote  on  the  question  :  if 
they  retain  such  opinions,  they  must  leave  the  State."  All  very  "  simple"  and  very 
"plain  ;"  and  the  plan  was  very  faithfully  executed, 
o* 


20  CHARACTEll    OF    THE    EEBELLION. 

found  no  opposition  in  any  doubtful  county.  *  *  *  My  object  is  to 
show  that  the  whole  secession  movement  was  planned  and  conducted 
in  the  spirit  of  headlong  revolution  and  premeditated  war.  In  Ten 
nessee  the  proceeding  was  even  less  orderly  than  in  Virginia.  In 
Missouri  it  was  no  better.  The  attempt  was  made  to  carry  Kentucky 
and  Maryland  by  the  same  arts  and  the  same  frauds,  but  utterly  failed. 
Maryland  has  repudiated  secession  and  its  abettors  with  a  persistent 
and  invincible  loyalty.  Kentucky,  under  severe  trial  and  in  the  actual 
contest  of  civil  war,  has  bravely  and  honorably  preserved  her  faith  and 
repelled  every  assault. 

We  have  given  this  long  extract,  not  because  any  proof 
is  wanting  of  the  fraud  and  violence  by  which  the  rebel 
lion  was  inaugurated,  but  to  show  in  these  graphic  details 
what  loyal  men  all  through  the  South  suffered  at  the  outset 
for  opposing  the  insane  movement.  This  authority  is 
unquestionable.  The  extract  is  taken  from  the  National 
Intelligencer,  of  Washington,  D.  C.,  of  Feb.  23,  1864. 
The  editor  indorses  the  writer  as  "  evincing  ability,  sa 
gacity,  and  fine  analysis,  in  laying  bare  the  secret  springs 
of  the  great  insurrection,"  and  says  he  is  a  "  Southern  gen 
tleman  who  for  many  years  occupied  Avith  distinction  a 
seat  in  the  National  Legislature,  and  who  subsequently 
held  a  responsible  post  in  the  administration  of  an  impor 
tant  Executive  Department  of  the  Government."* 

*  At  a  Union  meeting  in  Huntsville,  Alabama,  on  the  5th  of  March,  1864,  the 
Hon.  Jeremiah  Clemens,  formerly  a  Uuited  States  Senator  from  that  State,  addressed 
the  meeting,  and  said  "  he  would  tell  the  Alabarnians  how  their  State  was  got  out 
of  the  Union."  He  proceeded  to  say  :  "  In  1861,  shortly  after  the  Confederate  Gov 
ernment  was  put  in  operation,  I  was  in  the  city  of  Montgomery.  One  day  I  stepped 
into  the  office  of  the  Secretary  of  War,  General  Walker,  and  found  there,  engaged  in 
a  very  excited  discussion,  Mr.  Jefferson  Davis,  Mr.  Memminger,  Mr.  Benjamin,  Mr. 
Gilchrist,  a  member  of  our  Legislature  from  Lowndes  county,  and  a  number  of  other 
prominent  gentlemen.  They  were  discussing  the  propriety  of  immediately  opening 
tire  on  Fort  Sumter.  to  which  General  Walker,  the  Secretary  of  War,  appeared  to 
be  opposed.  Mr.  Gilchrist  said  to  him  :  'Sir,  unless  you  sprinkle  blood  in  the  face 
of  the  people  of  Alabama  they  will  be  back  in  th?  old  Union  in  less  than  ten  days !' 
The  next  day  General  Beauregard  opened  the  batteries  on  Sumter.  and  Alabama  was 
saved  to  the  Confederacy."  Another  distinguished  statesman  says  upon  the  same  gen- 


PROSECUTED  BY  CRUELTY  AND  TERROR.       2J 


PROSECUTED  BY  CRUELTY  AXD  TERROR. 

G.  This  rebellion  was  not  only  initiated  by  fraud  and 
violence,  through  the  means  by  which  its  ordinances  of 
secession  were  enacted,  but  during  every  stage  of  its  pro 
gress,  from  its  birth  to  the  present  hour,  it  has  been  prose 
cuted  with  the  most  atrocious  cruelty  towards  those  in  tlie 
revolted  States  who  have  dared  to  oppose  the  designs  of 
its  leaders. 

From  its  inception  till  now,  the  world  has  been  told  by 
public  men  and  by  the  organs  of  public  opinion  in  the 
South,  that  the  people  were  a  unit  in  support  of  the 
rebellion,  while  the  world  has  all  the  time  had  the  most 
certain  knowledge  that  this  was  only  a  stupendous  false 
hood,  concocted  and  persisted  in  for  political  purposes. 
The  evidence  of  this  is  overwhelming,  and  is  sustained  by 
facts  which  meet  us  at  every  stage  of  the  movement. 

The  people  have  heard  so  much  during  the  present 
year,  since  the  opening  of  the  rebel  Congress  in  December 
last,  of  the  sweeping  conscription  measures  by  which  all 
from  sixteen  to  fifty-five  capable  of  bearing  arms  have 
been  driven  into  the  army,  and  of  the  total  repudiation 
of  plighted  faith  in  forcing  those  to  enter  it  who  had 
secured  legal  exemption  by  furnishing  substitutes,  and 
other  oppressive  acts  of  a  like  character,  that  they  forget 
that  impressments  into  their  armies  by  the  most  violent 
means  have  been  a  marked  feature  of  their  recruiting  ser 
vice  from  the  beginning  of  the  war.  Looking  back  over 

eral  subject :  "  Future  history  will  record,  thaf,  perhaps  with  two  exceptions,  the 
ordinance  of  secession  would  not  have  been  carried  in  any  of  the  seceding  States,  if 
the  people  could  have  been  permitted  a  fair,  uncontrolled  election,  by  ballot  upon  it. 
But  they  were  overwhelmed  by  fraud  and  force  ;  and  then  they  were  told,  accord 
ing  to  the  improved  theory  of  State  rights,  that  whenever  a  majority  of  a  State  had 
resolved  to  commit  treason,  the  minority  were  bound  not  only  to  submit,  but  to 
share  the  sin  and  shame.  Those  whom  argument  failed  to  convince,  the  military 
despotism  had  silenced,  for  the  time  being." 


22  CHARACTER    OF   THE    REBELLION. 

the  events  of  the  spring  and  summer  of  1861, — a  period 
when  rebel  fervor  was  at  its  height,  and  when  the 
expectation  of  speedy  success  to  their  arms  was  upon  the 
lips  of  all  their  leaders, — we  find  that  rigorous  impress 
ments  pervaded  all  parts  of  the  South.  The  proof  is  fur 
nished  in  the  Southern  papers  of  that  period,  but  we  can 
not  occupy  space  with  the  details. 

But  these  are  among  the  least  offensive  measures  which 
were  taken  to  crush  out  loyalty  to  the  United  States.  The 
tens  of  thousands  of  individuals  and  families  who  have 
been  forced  to  flee  for  life,  leaving  home  and  property, 
penniless  and  friendless,  and  the  many  who  have  remained 
only  to  suffer  imprisonment,  indignity,  and  death,  are  facts 
well  attested,  and  have  occurred  from  the  beginning  of  the 
revolt  down  to  a  late  period. 

As  early  as  August  14th,  1861,  after  multitudes  had  fled 
from  rebel  tyranny,  Jefferson  Davis  issued  the  following 
edict  of  banishment : 

I  do  hereby  warn  and  require  every  male  citizen  of  the  United 
States,  of  the  age  of  fourteen  years  and  upwards,  now  within  the  Con 
federate  States,  and  adhering  to  the  Government  of  the  United  States, 
and  acknowledging  the  authority  of  the  same,  and  not  being  a  citizen 
of  the  Confederate  States,  to  leave  within  forty  days  after  the  date  of 
this  proclamation.  And  I  do  warn  all  persons  above  described  who 
shall  remain  within  the  Confederate  States,  after  the  expiration  of  tho 
said  period  of  forty  days,  that  they  will  be  held  as  alien  enemies. 

All  know  what  followed  the  issuing  of  this  decree.  The 
North  was  soon  filled  with  Southern  refugees.  A  well- 
informed  witness  declared  at  the  time  that  "two  hundred 
thousand  men,  women,  and  children,  in  the  single  State 
of  Tennessee,  had  thus  received  '  notice  to  quit,'  the  most 
of  them  thus  driven  from  the  land  that  gave  them  birth." 

The  persons  who  have  thus  suffered  persecution  at  home, 
and  banishment,  are  from  every  rank  in  life,  from  the 


PROSECUTED    BY    CRUELTY    AND   TERROR.  23 

mechanic  and  day-laborer,  to  those  in  all  the  professions : 
clergymen,  lawyers,  physicians,  members  of  Congress, 
United  States  Senators,  and  judges  of  the  highest  courts  of 
the  State  and  of  the  Nation.  In  the  spring  and  summer 
of  1861,  Senator  Johnson  and  Messrs.  Etheridge,  Bridges, 
Maynard,  Nelson,  all  then  or  previously  members  of  Con 
gress,  were  compelled  to  flee  from  the  single  State  of  Ten 
nessee,  or,  being  out  of  the  State,  found  it  unsafe  to  return. 
Judges  Catron  and  Trigg,  of  the  same  State,  with  others 
of  the  bench,  the  former  of  the  United  States  Supreme 
Court,  were  treated  in  like  manner.  Judge  Catron  did 
not  dare,  nor  was  he  permitted,  to  visit  his  home  in  Nash 
ville  until  Middle  Tennessee  was  repossessed  by  the 
United  <  States  forces.  Judge  Wayne,  also  of  the  Supreme 
Court  of  the  United  States,  whose  residence  was  in 
Georgia,  being  in  attendance  upon  his  official  duties  at 
Washington  when  the  rebellion  began,  and  determined  to 
remain  loyal  to  his  oath  and  his  country,  has  never  since 
ventured  to  visit  his  State,  and  will  not  be  able  to  do  so 
except  under  the  protection  of  the  arms  of  the  Union. 
The  only  crime  for  which  these  men  were  exiled  from  the 
land  of  their  birth,  and  for  which  others  have  suffered 
imprisonment  at  home,  was  their  determination  to  adhere  to 
the  Government  which  had  always  given  them  protection, 
their  regard  for  their  solemn  oaths  of  office,  and  their  un 
willingness  to  yield  to  the  demands  of  a  godless  rebellion. 
If  persons  of  such  distinction  can  be  so  treated,  and 
were  so  treated  at  the  beginning  of  the  revolt,  no  large 
amount  of  credulity  is  demanded  to  believe  that  thousands 
of  less  note  have  been  subjected  to  the  most  cruel  doom. 
We  have  undoubted  proof  of  this,  relating  to  every  period 
since  the  beginning  of  the  war,  and  we  fairly  infer  that 
there  are  multitudes  of  like  cases  of  which  the  public  never 
hear. 


24  CHARACTER    OF    THE    REBELLION. 

Among  numerous  testimonies  at  hand,  we  give  an  illus 
tration  of  this  point  from  the  address  of  Governor  Hamil 
ton,  of  Texas,  to  the  people  of  that  State,  issued  in  January 
last.  We  too  well  know  that  Texas  does  not  stand  solitary 
and  alone  in  the  work  here  graphically  described.  The 
same  tale  is  true  of  every  rebel  State.  Governor  Hamilton 
begins  by  barely  referring  to  his  own  treatment: 

CITIZENS  OF  TEXAS  :  Through  the  instrumentality  of  ambitious  and 
designing  men,  you  have  been  for  more  than  two  and  a  half  years 
engaged  in  rebellion  against  the  Government  of  the  United  States. 
Hunted  as  a  felon,  and  expelled  from  the  State  because  I  would  not 
join  the  conspiracy  to  overthrow  free  government,  I  now,  after  an  exile 
of  eighteen  months,  return  to  it,  charged  with  the  duty  of  organizing 
such  Provisional  State  Government  as  may  be  best  calculated  to  aid  in 
restoring  you  to  the  blessings  of  civil  liberty.  When  you  were  forced, 
by  a  minority,  into  rebellion,  you  were  in  the  enjoyment  of  every  bless 
ing  ever  conferred  by  civil  government  uuon  men.  Not  a  single  wrong 
had  you  ever  suffered  from  the  Government.  *  *  *  Martial  law  has 
been  visited  upon  you,  and  in  every  town,  and  village,  and  neighborhood, 
some  petty  despot  appointed,  to  whose  edicts  you  were  required  to  bow 
in  meek  submission.  You  have  been  denied  the  right  to  travel  through 
the  community  near  your  homes,  on  the  most  necessary  business, 
without  the  written  permission  of  one  of  these  tools  of  tyranny.  You 
dare  not  convey  to  market  the  product  of  your  farms  and  your 
labor  without  permission.  Your  wagons  and  teams  have  been  seized  by 
Government  agents  at  home  and  on  the  road  to  market,in  order  to  com 
pel  you  to  sell  them  your  crops  for  a  nominal  price  in  worthless  paper. 
No  interest  has  been  secure,  and  no  right  sacred.  Law  and  order  no 
longer  exist  among  you.  *  *  *  The  vicious  and  depraved,  the  mur 
derers  and  ruffians  of  the  country,  are  banded  together  in  secret  socie 
ties,  known  as  "Sons  of  the  South,"  and  are  from  day  to  day  sitting  in 
judgment  on  the  lives  of  the  best  citizens  of  the  State.  Three  thousand 
of  your  citizens  have  perished  because  they  loved  good  government,  and  peace, 
and  order  in  society — perished  as  felons.  They  have  been  hung,  shot,  and 
literally  butchered ;  they  have  been  tortured,  in  many  instances,  beyond  any 
thing  known  in  savage  warfare.  Uncertainty,  and  gloom,  and  despair,  are 
resting  upon  you  to-day  like  the  frown  of  God.  Are  you  in  love  with 
tliis,  and  do  you  desire  it  to  continue  ? 


PROSECUTED  BY  CRUELTY  AND  TERROR.        25 

He  then  draws  a  picture  of  the  condition  of  things  just 
before  the  rebellion  began,  from  which  we  take  a  single 
paragraph : 

In  our  own  State,  during  the  summer  and  fall  of  1860,  according  to  the. 
published  account  of  the  murderers  themselves,  two  hundred  and  fifty  of  our 
free  citizens  were  hung  as  felons,  and  thousands  driven  from  their  homes 
and  compelled  to  leave  the  State,  because  they  were  SUSPECTED  of  infi 
delity  to  slavery.  And,  finally,  gathering  temerity  from  its  successful  war 
upon  the  rights  and  lives  of  the  citizens, -it  lifted  its  unholy  hand  to 
destroy  the  Government  to  whose  protection  it  owed  its  power. 

We  close  these  illustrations  of  rebel  cruelty  by  one  more 
quotation.  It  is  from  the  distinguished  Southern  states 
man  referred  to  under  the  foregoing  head,  and  commended 
so  highly  by  the  National  Intelligencer,  a  journal  that  will 
not  be  suspected  of  favoring  what  is  called  "  radicalism." 
He  is  speaking  chiefly  of  the  violence  practised  towards 
loyal  citizens  of  Virginia,  and  says : 

"What  argument  can  Virginia,  for  example,  make  in  favor  of  a  revolt 
against  the  authority  of  the  Union,  that  may  not  be  used  with  tenfold 
force  by  her  own  western  counties  to  justify  a  revolt  against  her?  Vir 
ginia  herself  had  really  no  definable  grievance  against  the  Union. 
*  *  She  has  never  yet  indicated  a  single  item  of  grievance  resulting 
from  the  acts  of  the  Federal  Government.  In  fact,  that  Government 
has  always  been,  in  great  part,  in  her  own  hands,  or  under  the  control 
of  her  influence.  If  she  has  not  been  happy  and  prosperous  it  is  sim 
ply  her  own  fault.  I  mean  to  say,  she  has  no  cause  whatever  to  excuse 
her  rebellion  against  the  Union.  Yet  she  revolted ;  we  may  say,  gave  to 
the  revolution  a  countenance  and  support,  without  which  it  would  have 
speedily  sunk  into  a  futile  enterprise.  Having  come  to  it,  she  assumed 
the  right  to  compel  her  unwilling  citizens  to  cast  their  lives  and  fortunes 
into  the  same  issue.  A  large  portion  of  her  people,  comprising  the 
inhabitants  of  many  counties  in  the  mountain  region  of  the  Alleghanies. 
have  always  been  distinguished, — as,  indeed,  seems  to  be  the  charac 
teristic  of  all  our  mountain  country, — for  their  strong  attachment  to  the 
Union.  These  people  have  an  aversion  to  slaves,  and  have  been  steadily 
intent  upon  establishing  and  expanding  a  system  of  free  labor.  They 
have,  therefore,  very  little  in  common,  either  of  sentiment  or  interest, 


26  CHARACTER    OF   THE    REBELLION. 

with  the  governing  power  of  the  State.  When,  therefore,  the  question 
of  secession  was  submitted  to  them,  they  voted  against  it.  From  that 
moment  they  were  marked,  and  when  the  State,  under  the  control  of  its 
lowland  interest,  raised  the  banner  of  revolt,  its  first  movement  was  to 
invite  the  Southern  army  to  occupy  the  mountain  districts,  to  overawe 
and  drive  the  people  there,  not  only  into  submission  to  the  dominant 
power  of  the  State,  but  into  active  hostility  against  the  Union.  To  this 
end  these  loyal  people  were  pursued  with  a  bitter  persecution,  harried 
by  a  ruffian  soldiery,  hunted  from  their  homes  into  the  mountain  fast 
nesses;  their  dwellings  burned  ;  their  crops  destroyed ;  their  fields  laid 
waste,  and  every  other  cruelty  inflicted  upon  them  to  which  the  savage 
spirit  of  revolution  usually  resorts  to  compel  the  assent  of  those  who 
resist  its  command.  The  inhabitants  of  these  beautiful  mountain  val 
leys  are  a  simple,  brave,  and  sturdy  people  ;  and  all  these  terrors  were 
found  insufficient  to  force  them  into  an  act  of  treason.  They  refused, 
and  in  their  turn  revolted  against  this  execrable  tyranny  and  drew  their 
swords  in  favor  of  the  Union.  What  more  natural  or  righteous  than 
such  a  resistance?  And  yet,  Virginia  affects  to  consider  this  the 
deepest  of  crimes,  and  is  continually  threatening  vengeance  against  what 
she  calls  these  rebels — Virginia,  the  rebel,  denouncing  rebellion !  Her 
own  plea  is  that  she  has  only  seceded,  but  Western  Virginia  rebels — 
there  is  a  great  difference. 

When  it  is  considered  that  unnumbered  multitudes  all 
through  the  South  have  been  subjected  to  similar  cruelties 
for  the  crime  of  loyalty  to  the  Government,  a^d  for  refus 
ing  to  be  driven  into  treason  and  rebellion  against  it, — and 
when  this  is  contrasted  with  the  "  leniency"  of  our  Govern 
ment,  which,  as  Governor  Hamilton  says,  is  without  a 
parallel  in  the  history  of  nations  dealing  with  treason  and 
traitors, — it  places  the  unblushing  cruelty  of  the  Southern 
leaders  and  their  minions  out  of  the  pale  of  all  comparison 
with  that  of  any  tyrannical  power,  claiming  to  be  civilized 
and  Christianized,  which  the  world  has  ever  known.* 

*  In  his  address  to  the  people  of  Texas,  Governor  Hamilton  truly  says :  "  In  the  history 
of  the  world,  there  cannot  be  found  one  example  of  a  government  dealing  with  a 
rebellion  against  its  rightful  authority  with  the  mercy  and  leniency  which  have  charac 
terized  the  United  States  in  this  war.  Out  of  the  multiplied  thousands  who  have 
been  taken  in  arms  against  the  Government,  no*  tiie  has  been  made  to  suffer  for  his 


ITS   DESOLATION    OF   THE   COUNTRY.  27 

ITS    DESOLATION    OF   THE    COUNTRY. 

7.  We  pass  over  some  of  the  other  characteristics  of  the 
rebellion,  with  a  bare  mention  of  them :  the  wide-spread 
desolation  which  it  has  brought  upon  the  whole  disloyul 
region,  to  every  interest,  material,  moral,  social,  and  rdi- 
gious  /  bringing  to  premature  and  dishonored  graves  the 
flower  of  a  whole  generation  of  their  young  men,  with 
multitudes  of  aged  fathers  and  stripling  boys,  pressed  into 
their  armies  by  the  merciless  conscription ;  leaving  their 
land  filled  with  widows  and  orphans,  to  mourn  and  weep 
out  the  remainder  of  an  embittered  life ;  the  threat 
ening  of  wide-spread  starvation  within  their  borders  ;  the 
laying  waste  of  nearly  the  whole  producing  regions  of 
agriculture,  from  the  desolation  which  more  or  less  always 
follows  the  track  of  armies  in  civil  war ;  the  disbanding 
of  their  institutions  of  learning  of  the  higher  grades,  to 
furnish  material  for  their  armies  ;*  the  injury  which,  from 

treason.  How  has  it  been  in  Texas  and  throughout  the  South?  Hecatombs  of 
victims  have  been  offered  upon  the  altar  of  rebellion !  The  men  who  are  responsible 
to  society  and  to  God  for  the  blood  of  a  thousand  good  citizens,  are  those  who  are 
praiing  about  the  tyranny  of  the  President  and  the  Government  of  the  United 
States." 

*  We  may  perhaps  take  this  ns  a  specimen  of  what  has  befallen  institutions  of 
learning  at  the  South.  If  this  is  true  of  North  Carolina,  where  there  has  always 
been  groat  disaffection  with  the  rebel  leaders,  we  may  readily  infer  the  condition 
of  colleges  in  other  States:  "The  effect  of  the  rebellion  on  Southern  Colleges  is  well 
illustrated  by  the  case  of  the  University  of  North  Carolina  at  Chapel  Hill.  In  1860, 
it  had  four  hundred  and  thirty  students ;  in  1S63,  but  sixty- three,  nearly  all  of  whom 
were  too  young  or  physically  incapacitated  for  service.  In  1860,  eighty-four  young 
men  graduated,  of  whom  one-seventh  are  known  to  have  fallen  in  battle.  Of  the 
eight  who  ranked  highest  in  the  class,  four  are  in  their  graves,  a  fifth  is  a  wound 
ed  prisoner,  and  the  others  are  in  the  army.  Of  the  Freshman  Class  of  that 
year,  eighty  in  number,  only  one  remained  to  graduate,  and  even  he  had  been  in  the 
army,  and  was  discharged  for  bad  health.  Though  none  of  the  fourteen  members 
of  the  Faculty  were  liable  to  conscription,  five  enlisted,  one  of  whom  was  killed; 
another  has  been  taken  prisoner  ;  the  third  was  severely  wounded,  and  the  fourth 
has  a  ruined  constitution.  Every  son  capable  of  service  of  the  remaining  nisio, 
eight  in  number,  entered  the  service,  and  two  of  them  have  been  mortally  wounded. 
Fifteen  young  men  of  the  village,  being  more  than  half  of  the  whole,  have  perished 
in  battle/' — New  York  paper. 


28  CHARACTER    OF   THE    REBELLION. 

the  nature  of  the  case,  must  have  befallen  the  churches, 
and  every  interest  of  religion  ;  and  the  inevitable  condi 
tion  of  the  South,  in  all  these  respects,  for  many  years  to 
come,  which  no  pen  can  portray; — together  with  the 
blighting  influence  upon  both  sections  of  the  country 
which  must  ever  attend  such  a  war,  in  the  burdens  of  tax 
ation,  which  must  be  felt  for  generations  to  come  ;  in  the 
social  demoralization  of  the  people  at  large,  the  corruption 
of  public  men,  the  familiarizing  of  the  mind  of  the  nation, 
and  especially  of  the  young,  with  scenes  of  bloodshed  and 
carnage,  and  the  desire  for  other  wars,  all  which  are  the 
common  fruits  of  all  such  conflicts ;  the  like  destruction,  in 
the  North  as  in  the  South,  of  the  thousands  of  the  noble 
and  the  brave  who  have  fallen  in  battle,  with  the  agony 
which  has  been  brought  upon  the  households  of  the  whole 
territory  of  the  Union ;  and  the  social  alienation  and  bit 
terness  which  the  strife  has  engendered,  not  only  between 
the  two  sections  of  the  country  embroiled,  but  in  many 
instances  between  those  of  the  same  household,  both 
North  and  South. 

This  is  but  the  bare  mention, — and  by  no  means  all, — 
of  that  heritage  of  woes,  now  pressing,  and  long  to  be 
continued,  every  one  of  which  is  justly  chargeable  to 
this  rebellion. 

IT   AIMED   TO    USURP   THE    GOVERNMENT. 

8.  Another  characteristic  of  the  rebellion  is  seen  iu 
what  it  aimed  at  first  to  accomplish. 

Much  declamation  has  been  expended  by  public  men 
and  public  journals,  in  both  sections  of  the  country,  be 
cause  the  people  in  rebellion  are  not  allowed  to  have  their 
independence  and  separate  nationality.  But  it  was  not 
for  a  separate  Confederacy  that  the  rebel  leaders  first  in 
augurated  secession.  They  aimed  to  prevent  the  instal- 


IT    AIMED    TO    USURP   THE    GOVERNMENT.  20 

lation  of  the  present  Administration,  to  seize  the  Govern 
ment  and  the  public  offices  and  archives  at  Washington, 
and  by  a  coup  de  main  to  establish  themselves  in  power 
as  the  legitimate  succession  to  the  present  Government, 
and  to  impress  upon  it  that  character  which  they  have 
given  to  their  own  Constitution  ;  while  their  independence, 
as  a  separate  nation,  was  resolved  upon  only  in  the  event 
and  as  the  result  of  the  failure  of  their  original  plan. 

That  this  was  the  programme  laid  down  by  the  rebel 
leaders  is  the  very  general  conviction  of  the  intelligent  and 
loyal  people  of  the  country,  and  many  facts  fully  warrant 
this  conclusion.  It  was  the  opinion  freely  expressed  by 
members  of  Congress  and  other  public  men  in  their  pri 
vate  circles,  during  the  last  two  months  of  Mr.  Buchanan's 
administration  ;  and  it  is  believed  that  to  General  Winfield 
Scott,  more  than  to  any  other  man,  is  the  country  indebted 
for  the  frustration  of  the  scheme.  The  scattering  of  the 
small  forces  then  composing  the  army  of  the  United 
States  to  distant  military  posts,  and  the  sending  of  the 
vessels  of  the  navy  to  distant  seas,  by  the  respective  Sec 
retaries  of  the  War  and  Navy  Departments  ;  the  speedy 
gathering  of  a  few  hundred  regulars,  with  several  batteries 
of  artillery,  at  Washington,  by  order  of  General  Scott, 
when  he  apprehended  danger,  especially  at  the  time  the 
electoral  votes  were  to  be  opened  and  counted ;  the  wrath 
ful  speeches  of  Senator  Mason,  of  Virginia,  and  other 
Southern  statesmen,  when  they  saw  their  plans  foiled,  be 
cause  "  the  two  Houses  of  Congress  were  surrounded  by 
armed  soldiers,  as  though  they  wrere  sitting  in  an  Austrian 
capital ;"  the  subsequent  well-matured  plot  to  assassinate 
the  President  elect,  as  he  should  pass  through  Baltimore  ;* 

*  In  a  speech  in  the  United  States  House  of  Representatives,  April  8,  1SC4,  Mr. 
Long,  of  Cincinnati,  said:  "A  little  over  three  years  ago,  the  present  occupant  of  the 
Presidential  Mansion,  at  the  other  end  of  the  Avenue,  came  into  this  citj"  under  cover 


3J  CHARACTER    OF    THE    REBELLION. 

the  vigilant  preparations  deemed  essential  at  the  time  of 
Mr.  Lincoln's  inauguration,  when  the  troops  were  station 
ed  at  different  points  in  the  city,  and  Generals  Scott  and 
Wool  and  othqr  officers  stood  ready  to  mount  at  a  mo 
ment's  warning ;  these  are  all  well-remembered  facts,  and 
the  measures  then  taken  by  the  illustrious  head  of  the 
army  reveal  his  sagacity  and  patriotism,  and  illustrate,  in 
their  warding  off  the  threatened  evil,  the  debt  of  grati 
tude  due  him  from  his  countrymen. 

The  scheme  of  seizing  the  Government  was  not  aban 
doned  on  the  successful  inauguration  of  Mr.  Lincoln.  On 
the  evening  of  the  12th  of  April,  1861,  when  the  citizens 
of  Montgomery,  then  the  rebel  capital,  were  rejoicing  in 
the  prospect  of  Fort  Sumter's  speedy  fall,  the  bombard 
ment  being  then  in  progress,  General  Walker,  the  rebel 
Secretary  of  War,  made  the  following  declarations  in  a 
public  speech  :  "  That  before  many  hours  the  flag  of  the 

of  night,  disguised  in  plaid  cloak  and  Scotch  cap,  lest,  as  was  feared  by  his  friends, 
he  might  have  received  a  warmer  greeting  than  would  have  been  agreeable,  on  his 
way  through  Baltimore,  at  the  hands  of  the  constituents  of  the  gentleman  from 
Maryland.'1  Mr.  Long  is  one  of  the  opponents  of  the  present  Administration.  The 
Albamy  Evening  Journal  speaks  of  the  contemplated  assassination,  and  of  the 
measures  taken  to  prevent  it,  on  the  part  of  the  President's  friends,  as  follows : 
"They  employed  a  detective  of  great  experience,  who  was  engaged  at  Baltimore  in 
the  business  some  three  weeks  prior  to  Mr.  Lincoln's  arrival  there,  employing  both 
men  and  women  to  assist  him.  Shortly  after  coming  to  Baltimore,  the  detective 
discovered  a  combination  of  men  banded  together  under  a  solemn  oath  to  assassinate 
the  President  elect.  *  *  *  It  was  arranged,  in  case  Mr.  Lincoln  should  pass 
safely  over  the  railroad  to  Baltimore,  that  the  conspirators  should  mingle  with  the 
crowd  which  might  surround  his  carriage,  and  by  pretending  to  be  his  friends,  be 
enabled  to  approach  his  person,  when,  upon  a  signal  from  their  leader,  some  of  them 
-A'ould  shoot  at  Mr.  Lincoln  with  their  pistols,  and  others  would  throw  into  his  carriage 
hand-grenades  filled  with  detonating  powder,  similar  to  those  used  in  the  attempted 
assassination  of  the  Emperor  Louis  Napoleon.  It  was  intended  that  in  the  confusion 
which  should  result  from  this  attack,  the  assailants  should  escape  to  a  vessel  waiting 
in  the  harbor  to  receive  them,  and  be  carried  to  Mobile,  in  the  seceding  State  of 
Alabama."  Then,  speaking  of  Mr.  Lincoln,  the  Journal  says:  "The  party  then 
took  berths  in  the  sleeping-car  [at  Philadelphia],  and,  without  change  of  cars,  pas 
sed  directly  through  to  Washington,  where  they  arrived  at  the  usual  hour.  Mr. 
Lincoln  wore  no  disguise  whatever,  but  journeyed  in  an  ordinary  travelling 
dress." 


IT   AIMED   TO    USUKP   THE    GOVERNMENT.  31 

Confederacy  would  float  over  the  fortress ;  and  no  man 
could  tell  where  the  Avar  this  day  commenced  would  end, 
but  he  would  prophesy  that  the  flag  which  now  flaunts  the 
breeze  here,  would  float  over  the  dome  of  the  old  capital  at 
Washington  before  the  first  of  May"  This  speech  of 
General  Walker  struck  the  key-note  which  was  imme 
diately  echoed  by  the  newspapers  throughout  the  seceded 
States.  Though  Virginia  had  not  yet  seceded,  the  papers 
of  that  State  sounded  it.  The  Richmond  Enquirer  of  April 
13th,  the  day  of  the  fall  of  Fort  Sumter,  had  the  following : 
"  Nothing  is  more  probable  than  that  President  Davis  will 
soon  march  an  army  through  North  Carolina  and  Vir 
ginia  to  Washington.  Those  of  our  volunteers  who  desire 
to  join  the  Southern  army  as  it  shall  pass  through  our 
borders,  had  better  organize  at  once  for  the  purpose." 
This  was  published  nearly  a  week  before  the  Virginia 
Convention  passed  the  ordinance  of  secession,  and  forty 
days  before  the  people  were  to  vote  on  the  ordi 
nance.  This  was  also  two  days  before  President  Lincoln 
issued  his  Proclamation  (dated  April  15th),  calling  for 
troops,  and  before  it  was  known,  either  North  or  South, 
how  the  intelligence  of  the  taking  of  Fort  Sumter 
would  affect  either  the  Government  or  the  people.  Mr. 
Stephens,  the  rebel  Vice-President,  soon  afterwards 
uttered  the  same  sentiment  respecting  the  taking  of 
Washington,  in  a  public  speech  at  Richmond,  on  his  arri 
val  there  before  the  secession  of  Virginia,  and  before  the 
ordinance  had  passed  the  Convention,  when  on  a  mission 
to  conclude  a  "  military  league"  between  that  State  and 
the  Southern  Confederacy. 

There  is  nothing  clearer  in  the  early  history  of  the 
rebellion,  than  that  the  primary  plan  of  its  leaders  was  to 
overthrow  the  Administration  at  Washington,  to  usurp  its 
power  and  authority,  and  to  install  the  rebel  Government 


32  CHARACTER    OF    THE    REBELLION. 

as  its  legitimate  successor.  This  from  the  first  was  tho 
battle-cry  of  their  rulers,  their  armies,  and  their  people.  It 
is  only  because  they  were  foiled  in  their  original  purpose 
that  they  have  been  content  to  seek  to  establish  their  sep 
arate  independence. 

POPULAR    GOVERNMENT    UNIVERSALLY    ENDANGERED. 

9.  Another  thing  settled  in  the  character  of  this  rebel 
lion,  is,  that  its  success  would  have  destroyed  the  hope  for 
popular  government  throughout  the  world, 

A  successful  rebellion  resulting  in  the  overthrow  of  any 
other  government  on  earth  would  be  of  little  consequence 
in  the  great  scale  of  human  interests  when  poised  against 
such  a  result  to  the  Government  of  the  United  States. 
This  is  illustrated  in  the  deep  anxiety  with  which  the  con 
test  has  been  watched  on  both  sides  of  the  Atlantic  and 
by  the  people  of  every  nation.  The  aristocracies  of  the 
Old  World  have  aided  the  rebellion  as  far  as  they  have 
deemed  it  safe,  and  have  earnestly  desired  our  dismember 
ment  and  downfall.  They  have  felt  that  in  such  an  issue 
their  own  power  would  be  more  secure.  From  the  great 
heart  of  "  the  peoples"  alone  has  there  been  for  us  a  single 
genuine  throb  of  sympathy.  The  only  notable  exception 
to  this  among  the  rulers  in  the  monarchies  of  Europe  is 
that  of  the  Russian  Empire.  Even  many  of  the  middle 
classes  of  the  nations  of  Western  Europe,  and  among  them 
many  of  the  merchant  princes  of  her  marts  of  commerce, 
have  given  their  good  wishes  and  their  active  aid  and 
their  stores  of  gold  to  the  rebellion,  making  a  gain  out  of 
our  national  peril. 

But  the  millions  of  the  real  people  have  desired  our 
success  and  deserve  our  grateful  remembrance.  They  feel 
that  their  own  interests  are  bound  up  in  our  triumph. 
When,  therefore,  the  nation  shall  come  out  of  this  strife 


POPULAR  GOVERNMENT  ENDANGERED.         33 

successful,  they  will  feel  as  do  we,  that  what  the  nations 
of  the  earth  have  ever -regarded  as  but  uthe  American 
experiment,"  will  be  settled  in  favor  of  popular  govern 
ment  for  all  time  to  come.  One  universal  shout  of  re 
joicing  will  then  go  up  from  the  down-trodden  millions 
of  the  world,  and  at  its  reverberations  among  the  habita 
tions  of  men,  tyrants  will  everywhere  tremble  as  they 
have  never  done  before. 

Among  the  characteristics,  therefore,  which  stamp  this 
rebellion  with  peculiar  odium,  is  the  fact  not  only  that  it 
is  made  against  popular  government,  but  in  its  success  the 
last  hope  of  liberty  would  have  perished  from  among  men. 
No  people  could  have  dared  reasonably  to  hope  for  suc 
cess  in  an  experiment  of  free  institutions  after  ours  should 
have  failed,  commenced  as  it  was  under  such  favorable 
auspices,  and  having  had  such  prosperity  in  all  that  can 
make  a  people  great  and  glorious  for  nearly  three  genera 
tions. 

It  is  too  well  known  for  doubt  that  a  part  of  the  original 
scheme  of  the  rebel  leaders  was  to  establish  an  aristoc 
racy,  and  perhaps  a  monarchy,  and  if  we  may  judge  from 
very  recent  utterances  the  plan  is  not  abandoned.  To  this 
end,  as  well  as  to  secure  their  independence,  they  have 
sought  an  alliance  with  several  monarchical  powers,  and 
have  been  willing  to  place  themselves  under  their  protec 
tion  without  much  scruple  about  conditions  provided  their 
independence  could  be  gained. 

Should  the  rebellion  therefore  succeed,  and  the  plan 
of  the  Southern  oligarchy  be  consummated,  popular  gov 
ernment  throughout  the  world  would  thereby  receive 
a  double  blow,  in  the  dismemberment  of  that  system 
of  government,  where  it  has  now  its  fairest  illustra 
tion,  and  in  the  establishment  of  aristocratic  institutions 
in  its  stead  over  a  large  portion  of  the  territory  of  the 


34  CHARACTER    OF   THE    REBELLION. 

United  States,  and  over  several  millions  of  the  people  now 
embraced  within  its  legitimate  rule.* 

TO    PERPETUATE    NEGRO    SLAYERY. 

10.  And  finally,  this  is  a  rebellion  whose  chief  prompt 
ing  impulse,  at  its  inception  and  through  its  whole  pro 
gress,  has  been  the  security,  the  expansion  of  the  area,  and 
the  perpetuation,  of  human  bondage. 

That  the  slavery  of  the  negro  race,  as  the  stimulating 
power,  is  the  foundation  on  which  the  whole  superstruc 
ture  of  this  rebellion  rests,  is  a  fact  patent  to  the  eyes  of 
all  men.  But  as  we  reserve  this  point  for  a  separate 
chapter,  to  be  canvassed  when  we  come  to  speak  of  the 
causes  of  the  rebellion,  we  shall  not  dwell  upon  it  here. 
We  barely  mention  it  now  as  completing  the  summation 
and  forming  the  climax  in  the  catalogue  of  those  elements, 
— all  of  which  we  have  not  attempted  to  enumerate, — which 
give  a  special  character  to  the  rebellion,  and  stamp  it  as 
monstrous  and  diabolical  without  a  parallel  in  the  history 
of  mankind. 

When  we  speak  of  negro  slavery  as  being  at  the  bottom 
of  the  rebellion,  we  are  aware  that  this  is  denied.  The 
proof  of  our  position,  however,  to  be  given  hereafter,  will 
be  found  in  Southern  testimony  which  cannot  be  confuted. 
We  are  also  aware  that  other  causes  are  assigned,  the 
chief  of  which  are  :  that  the  rebellion  is  the  scheme  of  dis- 


*  No  man  better  understands  the  character  and  aims  of  the  rebellion  and  its  lead 
ers  than  Andrew  Johnson,  of  Tennessee,  a  candidate  for  the  Vice-Presidency.  In  a 
speech  at  Nashville,  June  10, 1864,  he  said  :  "  One  of  the  chief  elements  of  this  rebel 
lion,  is  the  opposition  of  the  slave  aristocracy  to  being  ruled  by  men  who  have  risen 
from  the  ranks  of  the  people.  This  aristocracy  hated  Mr.  Lincoln  because  he  was  of 
humble  origin,  a  rail-splitter  in  early  life.  One  of  them,  the  private  secretary  of 
Howell  Cobb,  said  to  me  one  day,  after  a  long  conversation,  '  We  people  of  the  South 
will  not  submit  to  be  governed  by  a  man  who  has  come  up  from  the  ranks  of  the 
common  people,  as  Abe  Lincoln  has.1  He  uttered  the  essential  feeling  and  spirit  of 
this  Southern  rebellion." 


TO   PERPETUATE   J^EGKO    SLAVERY.  35 

appointed  and  ambitious  politicians ;  a  desire  for  an  inde 
pendent  nationality ;  a  wish  to  found  an  aristocracy,  or  a 
•monarchy,  or  both ;  a  strike  for  free  trade,  and  to  be  rid 
of  Northern  competition ;  a  vindication  of  the  doctrine  of 
State  rights ;  a  jealousy  and  chagrin  at  Northern  growth 
and  prosperity,  in  comparison  with  Southern ;  or,  these 
and  other  similar  causes  all  combined ;  and  that  slavery, 
and  the  Presidential  election  of  1860,  were  "a  mere  pre 
text."  We  grant  the  substantial  truth  of  what  are  here 
given  as  auxiliary  causes  of  the  rebellion ;  and  yet,  it  is 
further  true,  as  we  shall  see,  that  it  is  NEGRO  SLAVERY,  hi 
its  emoluments  in  the  Rebel  States,  in  its  fears  of  en 
croachment  and  apprehended  dangers,  and  especially  in 
its  modern  garb  as  "-divine.,"  and  a  political  and  social 
"good  in  itself  to  all  concerned,  that  underlies-  all  other 
causes,  and  gives  the  vital  and  essential  force  to  carry  these 
desires  and  aspirations  into  execution  in  the  form  of  open 
rebellion. 
3 


36  CAUSE   OF  THE   REBELLION. 


CHAPTER  II. 

CAUSE    OF    THE    KEBELLIOK 

IT  is  among  the  marvels  which  our  civil  war  has  exhib 
ited,  that  there  should  be  a  difference  of  opinion  concern 
ing  the  reasons  which  have  prompted  the  rebellion  now  in 
progress  against  the  Government  of  the  United  States. 
But  if  we  may  judge  from  the  speeches  of  public  men  in 
Congress,  in  State  Legislatures,  upon  the  stump,  from  the 
messages  of  Governors  of  States,  from  the  resolutions  of 
political  bodies,  and  from  the  current  literature  of  public 
journals, — all  confined,  however,  to  the  loyal  States,  but 
found  in  every  stage  of  the  contest  from  the  beginning  till 
now, — we  see  that  there  is  as  wide  a  variance  upon  this 
simple  point  as  can  be  found  upon  any  other  question  of 
fact  or  policy  touching  the  rebellion,  or  any  other  matter 
concerning  human  interests  upon  which  men  are  commonly 
divided.  Upon  discovering  this,  one  might  be  led  to  the 
conclusion  that  there  are  inherent  difficulties  in  the  solu 
tion  of  the  case.  But  it  is  one  of  the  plainest  of  all  things 
connected  with  the  whole  movement,  and  it  is  quite  re 
markable  that  there  should  be  disagreement  upon  it,  at 
least  among  truly  loyal  men. 

SLAVERY   THE   CAUSE. 

As  perfectly  decisive  of  the  difficulty,  if  there  be  any 
whatever,  it  is  well  known  that  in  the  Rebel  States  and 
among  those  engaged  in  the  rebellion,  there  has  been  but 
one  prime  reason  assigned  for  it  from  first  to  last,  as  put 
forth  by  their  public  men  and  echoed  by  all  their  organs 


SLAVERY    THE   CAUSE.  37 

of  public  opinion.  This  is  so  plainly  true,  and  the  reason 
itself  is  so  plain  and  so  plainly  stated,  that  it  would  seem 
a  little  wonderful,  did  we  not  know  too  well  the  political 
corruption  which  abounds,  that  all  men  in  the  loyal  States, 
including  those  who  sympathize  with  the  rebellion,  should 
not  be  content  to  permit  the  rebel  leaders  to  make  their 
own  statement  of  the  case  on  this  point,  and  to  allow  that 
statement  to  be  true.  With  all  the  frenzied  fury  and  dis 
regard  of  truth  which  they  have  shown,  and  the  want  of 
sagacity  and  ordinary  good  sense  which  have  characterized 
ten  thousand  things  which  they  have  said  and  done  in  the 
progress  of  their  horrid  work,  we  must  certainly  allow  a 
sufficient  method  to  their. madness  to  suppose  that  they  at 
least  knew  and  could  tell  for  what  they  rebelled.  They 
probably  did  know;  they  certainly  have  told;  and  they 
all  agree. 

In  a  word,  they  declare  that  it  was  FOR  NEGRO  SLAVERY 
that  they  rebelled :  for  its  security  against  apprehended 
peril ;  for  its  expansion  into  free  territory,  wherever  their 
inclinations  and  interests  might  prompt  them  to  carry  it ; 
and  for  its  perpetuation.  This  is  what  they  universally 
present  as  the  reason  for  their  course,  warranting,  with 
certain  discriminations,  the  concise  remark  we  often  hear, 
that  "  slavery  is  the  cause  of  the  rebellion,"  and  that 
"  slavery  is  the  cause  of  the  war." 

Here  then  we  might  rest  and  dismiss  the  case.  But  as 
this  is  a  controverted  point,  we  shall  present  the  opposite 
view  as  held  by  rebel  sympathizers  and  certain  Union  men, 
and  then  give  the  conclusive  evidence  which  sustains  the 
position  we  take,  that  it  was  in  the  interest  of  slavery  alone 
that  the  rebellion  was  undertaken ;  that  "  the  duty"  which 
devolved  upon  the  South  was  "  plain,  of  conserving  and 
transmitting  the  system  of  slavery,  with  the  freest  scope 
for  its  natural  development  and  extension." 


88  CAUSE    OF   THE    REBELLION. 


AN    OPPOSITE    VIEW. 

Among  other  distinguished  witnesses  to  the  position, 
that  to  secure  greater  immunities  to  slavery  was  not  the 
cause  of  the  rebellion,  is  found  the  Hon.  George  Robertson, 
a  former  Chief- Justice  of  Kentucky,  and  a  friend  of  the 
Union.  In  a  series  of  elaborate  papers  on  national  affairs, 
published  a  few  months  since  in  the  Louisville  Journal,  he 
declared  that  it  was  not  slavery, — "  not  security  for  an  in 
stitution  that  needed  none  better  than  the  Constitution," — 
for  which  "  the  leading  conspirators"  rebelled  ;  but  it  was 
because  the  "  South  sought  independence"  He  presents 
seven  reasons,  formally  laid  down,  for  this  opinion,  con 
cluding  thus  :  "  7th  and  lastly.  Some  of  the  leaders,  with 
out  contradiction  or  dissent,  said  in  Convention  (we  pre 
sume  the  Judge  refers  to  that  of  South  Carolina),  that  they 
had  been  hatching  independence  for  more  than  thirty  years, 
and  ridiculed  the  idea  that  autislaveryism,  in  any  of  its 
phases,  was  the  cause  of  their  secession."  He  elsewhere 
says:  "  Thus  the  treacherous  and  prescriptive  concoctors 
of  rebellion  initiated  this  unholy  war ;  and  hence  some  of 
them  truly  said  in  Convention,  that  the  warfare  waged  by 
abolitionists  against  the  institution  of  slavery  and  the 
security  of  elave  property,  was  a  '  God-send'  to  the  advo 
cates  of  Southern  independence."* 

*We  deem  it  but  just  to  Judge  Eobertson  to  give  his  seven  propositions  together 
and  in  full:  "That  the  leading  conspirators  South  sought  independence, — mid  not 
security  for  an  institution  that  needed  none  better  than  the  Constitution  they  so  long 
conspired  to  destroy, — should  not  be  doubted  for  these  among  other  reasons:  1st. 
They  knew  that,  from  time  to  time,  they  had  obtained  every  supplemental  security 
which  they  had  asketi  or  desired  excepting  only  the  humbug  of  ;  protection'  in  North 
ern  Territories,  where  slavery  could  never  long  or  usefully  exist,  and  where  majori 
ties  of  the  inhabitants  would  not  want  it.  2d.  They  knew  that  no  person  claimed 
for  Congress  power  to  abolish  or  disturb  slavery  in  the  States,  and  that  Congressional 
non-intervention  in  Territories, — which  they  had  secured  as  far  as  useful  to  the  South 
by  the  Missouri  Compromise  of  1820, and  everywhere  by  the  'finality'  of  1S50, — was 
all  they  wanted  or  had  any  right  to  expect  3d.  They  wantonly  threw  away  these 


AN    OPPOSITE    VIEW.  39 

Our  space  will  not  allow  us  to  quote  more  at  large  from 
the  Judge ;  but  as  we  have  said  he  is  a  Union  man,  we  give 
a  sentence  or  two  among  many  to  show  this,  and  to  show 
his  view  of  slavery  as  an  institution,  and  that  he  would  not 
allow  it  to  come  into  competition  with  the  preservation  of 
the  Union :  "  I  am  not,  nor  ever  was,  pro-slavery  in  feeling 
or  in  principle.  I  would  delight  to  see  all  men  free.  But 
I  know  that  this  is  impossible  until  the  different  races  ap 
proximate  more  nearly  to  moral  equality."  Speaking  of 
the  "  less  ambitious  masses"  in  the  South,  who  "  rushed 
inconsiderately  into  the  maelstrom  of  this  shocking  rebel 
lion,"  he  says  :  "  They  ought  to  have  known  better,  and 
set  up  for  themselves.  But,  had  they  not  been  deluded, 

securities  for  the  normal  expansion  of  slavery  by  their  suicidal  abrogation  in  1854  of 
these  pledges  of  national  faith,  thereby  indicating  that  their  agitations  of  *moot  ques 
tions  of  slavery  were  intended,  not  for  that  institution  or  its  incidents,  but  only  for 
independence  and  power.  4th.  They  knew,  that,  before  President  Lincoln's  inaugu 
ration,  Congress  had  organized  all  the  new  Territories  without  any  interdiction  of 
slavery,  and  proposed  also  an  amendment  to  the  Constitution  expressly  and  irrevo 
cably  providing  against  any  Congressional  interference  with  slavery  in  any  State ; 
and  they  knew  that  the  incoming  President  and  party  were  committed,  by  their 
Chicago  platform,  against  all  such  intervention;  and,  moreover,  knowing  that  a 
majority  of  Congress  and  of  the  Supreme  Court  were  on  their  side,  enough  of  the 
Southern  members  of  Congress  abdicated  to  give  the  Eepublican  party  a  majority, 
thus  showing  that  they  were  plotting  pretexts  for  revolt;  not  for  security  to  slavery, 
but  for  independence  and  a  different  form  of  government.  5th.  They  knew  or 
ought  to  have  known  that  their  peculiar  institution  would  be  safer  and  more  peace 
ful  under  our  National  Constitution  binding  on  all  the  people,  North,  as  well  as 
South,  than  under  a  'compact'  of  Confederation  by  'sovereign  States,'  without  a 
semblance  of  legal  obligation  on  any  people  or  States  not  parties  to  it.  6th.  They 
wantonly  destroyed  the  unity  and  nationality  of  their  Democratic  party  in  I860,  and 
thereby  promoted  Mr.  Lincoln's  election,  which  they  preferred  to  that  of  Douglas  or 
Bell,  and  then  made  that  election  a  prominent  pretext  for  secession.  7th  and  lastly. 
Some  of  the  leaders,  without  contradiction  or  dissent,  said  in  Convention  that  they 
had  been  hatching  independence  for  more  than  thirty  years,  and  rkliculed  the  idea 
that  antislaveryism,  in  any  of  its  phases,  was  the  cause  of  their  secession."— Louis- 
wile  Journal,  Oct.  19,  1863.  Many  persons  at  the  North,  and  some  papers,  both 
secular  and  religious,  embracing  those  who  are  loyal  and  disloyal,  have  most  strenu 
ously  maintained  that  slavery  was  not  the  cause  of  the  rebellion  ;  that  it  was  not 
to  render  it  more  secure  against  supposed  aggressions  that  the  States  seceded  ;  that 
this  was  "  a  more  pretext."  We  shall  see  the  fallacy  of  this  position  from  testimony 
which  cannot  be  overthrown. 


40  CAtfSE    OF   THE   REBELLION. 

and  the  issue  had  really  been  between  the  Union  and 
slavery,  even  then  they  ought,  for  their  own  welfare,  to 
have  stood  by  the  Union,  which  would  surely  be  better 
without  slavery  than  could  be  slavery  without  such  a 
Union." 

Judge  Robertson's  position  as  to  the  ground  of  the 
rebellion  is  very  much  like  that  of  some  others  among 
loyal  men.  We  are  not,  at  this  point,  concerned  with  the 
reasons  which  he  gives  for  it,  but  rather  with  the  question 
of  its  correctness.  But  before  adducing  the  proof  for  a 
contrary  position,  we  will  state  some  of  the  obvious  dis 
criminations  which  should  be  borne  in  mind. 

IN   WHAT   SENSE    SLAVERY   IS    THE    CAUSE. 

When  slavery  is  charged  with  having  caused  the  rebel 
lion  and  the  war,  no  more  can  justly  be  meant  than  that 
it  is  the  occasion  of  both.  Nor  is  this  all.  It  is  scarcely 
just  to  hold  the  institution,  as  such,  to  this  responsibility. 
It  has  been  made  the  occasion.  Nor  does  this  exhaust  the 
proper  distinctions  of  the  case.  It  has  been  made  the 
occasion  only  in  the  hands  of  wicked  and  designing  men. 
Many  slaveholders  are  as  true  and  loyal  to  the  Govern 
ment,  and  have  shown  this  during  the  whole  progress  of 
the  rebellion,  as  any  men  in  the  country.  Nor  is  this  seen 
in  the  Border  States  only.  If  these  designing  men, 
whether  open  or  secret  rebels,  are  found  among  the  slave 
holders  of  every  Border  State,  so  also  loyal  slaveholders, 
who  have  been  such  from  first  to  last,  may  probably  be 
found  in  every  seceded  State.  As  our  arms  have  advanced, 
this  has  been  found  true ;  not  merely  where  men  have 
avowed  their  loyalty  in  the  hope  of  retaining  their  slaves, 
or  of  receiving  compensation  for  them  from  the  Govern 
ment,  but  where  some  of  the  largest  slaveholders  have 
always  retained  their  loyalty  notwithstanding  the  terrors 


IN   WHAT   SENSE    SLAVERY    IS   THE    CAUSE.  41 

of  rebel  rule.  "We  personally  know  such  cases  in  the 
Southwestern  States,  those  of  men  who  have  been  obliged 
to  keep  silent,  but  who  nevertheless  have  maintained  their 
allegiance  to  the  Government.  It  is  also  no  doubt  true, 
that  many  in  those  States  who  gave  in  their  adhesion  to 
the  rebel  leaders  did  so  under  duress,  to  save  property  and 
life,  and  who  may  therefore  be  regarded,  without  any 
straining  of  that  charity  and  patriotism  which  both  moral 
and  political  justice  should  extend  to  them,  as  truly  loyal 
men.  It  would  be  among  the  strangest  of  all  phenomena 
if  these  things  were  not  so.  It  would  be  tantamount  to 
saying  that  all  men  in  the  South  conceded  the  superior 
wisdom  and  approved  the  measures  of  the  rebel  leaders, 
and  sustained  them  on  these  grounds  ;  whereas,  it  is  known 
that  from  the  first,  many  men  in  the  seceded  States,  far 
more  sagacious  and  less  blinded  by  ambition  than  those 
who  assumed  the  control  of  affairs,  warned  the  people 
against  rebellion,  pointed  out  the  failure  of  their  schemes, 
declared  the  falsity  of  their  prophecies,  foretold  the  ruin 
which  would  come  upon  their  section  of  the  country,  and 
the  result  has  already  vindicated  their  sagacity  and  sealed 
their  patriotism.  It  is  therefore  not  just  to  hold  the  insti 
tution  of  slavery,  as  such, — embracing,  of  consequence, 
all  slaveholders, — responsible,  either  for  the  rebellion  or 
the  war. 

What  is  true  is  this  :  that  ambitious  men,  fearing  with 
out  just  cause  that  the  Administration  now  in  power,  and 
the  party  that  had  put  it  in  power,  designed  to  destroy 
slavery  in  the  whole  country, — or,  if  not  believing  this, 
pretending  at  least  to  believe  it,  and  taking  this  ground 
before  the  people,  and  convincing  large  numbers  that  this 
was  their  design, — induced  the  States  to  rebel,  that  they 
might  give  to  the  institution  greater  expansion,  security, 
and  power,  and,  with  God's  permission,  perpetuate  it  for- 


42  CAUSE    OF   THE   REBELLION. 

ever.     This  was  substantially  the  position  taken  by  lead 
ing  men,  the  controllers  of  public  opinion,  in  both  Church 

and  State. 

\ 

MODERN    VIEWS    AND    POWER    OF    SLAVERY. 

It  is  among  the  clearest  facts  known,  that  within  the 
period  of  some  thirty  years  or  more,  a  total  revolution  had 
taken  place  in  the  Southern  mind,  extending  to  almost  the 
entire  people,  regarding  the  status  of  slavery  as  an  institu 
tion,  embracing  its  political,  social,  and  moral  character 
and  relations.  The  causes  of  this  change  were,  in  part, 
the  enormous  pecuniary  profits  of  the  institution,  which 
led  political  economists  and  statesmen  to  defend  and  com 
mend  it,  and  thus  to  repudiate  the  views  of  the  fathers  of 
the  Republic ;  and,  in  part,  the  teachings  of  the  ministers 
of  religion,  who  had  discovered  new  light  in  interpreting 
the  word  of  God,  which  led  them  to  defend  and  commend 
it  as  a  Divine  Ordinance,  and  thus  to  repudiate  the  views 
of  the  fathers  of  the  American  Church.  And  it  is  a  fact 
of  marked  significance,  that,  in  this  change  of  opinion,  the 
clergy,  in  many  distinguished  instances,  led  the  way,  and 
they  are  no  doubt  justly  held  to  a  higher  responsibility  for 
it  than  any  other  class  of  men.  They  will  not  of  course 
deem  this  any  disparagement,  although  they  might  decline 
the  distinction  here  given  them,  for  they  claim  to  have 
done  a  good  work.  Of  the  reality  of  this  change,  and  who 
are  mainly  responsible  for  it,  we  shall  give  the  evidence  in 
due  time. 

rThis  revolution  in  Southern  opinion,  made  slavery,  in 
many  important  respects,  a  totally  different  affair  in  South 
ern  society  from  what  it  had  ever  hitherto  been  regarded. 
It  was  so  interwoven  with  its  whole  structure,  was  so  com 
pletely  the  basis  of  labor,  in  a  section  of  country  almost 
wholly  agricultural,  and  brought  to  the  coffers  of  the  mas- 


MODERN   VIEWS    AND   POWER    OF    SLAVERY.  43 

ter  such  untold  wealth,  that  it  had  become  the  most  vital 
element  in  Southern  civilization.*  It  gave  social  position 
and  political  power.  It  prescribed  customs  to  the  house 
hold  and  gave  laws  to  the  State.  It  influenced  all  their 
systems  of  education  and  made  a  tenet  in  their  religion. 
The  mechanic  and  the  day-laborer,  the  gentleman  of  leis 
ure  and  the  man  of  business,  the  lawyer  and  the  physician, 
the  judge  and  the  clergyman,  all  professions  and  all  insti 
tutions,  came  under  its  sway  and  called  it  master.  It  was 
respectable,  honorable,  a  necessity,  divine.  It  had  no 
traceable  origin  ;  it  had  always  existed.  It  was  sanctioned 
by  the  law  of  nature,  by  the  consent  of  all  times  and  all 
peoples,  and  by  the  law  of  God.  It  had  come  from  the 
Patriarchs,  was  embedded  in  the  decalogue,  regulated  by 
the  institutions  of  Moses,  sustained  by  the  Prophets,  vin 
dicated  by  Christ  and  the  Apostles.  All  this  had  become 
the  staple  of  Southern  thought,  the  touchstone  of  South 
ern  fidelity.  It  was  promulgated  in  books  and  news 
papers,  harangued  from  the  stump  and  in  legislative  halls, 
taught  in  the  schools,  pronounced  in  the  courts,  and 
preached  from  the  pulpit.  Southern  society  had  become 
permeated  with  these  views.  It  lived  and  breathed  in  this 
intellectual  and  moral  atmosphere.  The  sentiments  and 
feelings  which  such  a  system  begat,  sustained  men  through 
the  activities  of  the  day,  gave  them  repose  at  night,  and 
administered  consolation  in  the  hour  of  death. 

When  matters  had  come  to  this  pass,  under  the  teach 
ings  of  recent  times  and  the  golden  reign  of  the  Fibrous 
King,  how  was  it  possible  for  the  leaders  in  such  opinions 
to  be  content  that  slavery  should  remain  in  the  strait- 
jacket  put  upon  it  by  the  fathers  of  the  Republic  ?  How 

*  "Must  I  pause  to  show  how  it  (slavery)  has  fashioned  our  modes  of  life,  and 
determined  all  our  habits  of  thought  and  feeling,  and  moulded  the  very  type  of  our 
civilization?"— Dr.  Palmer,  Thanksgiving  Discourse,  New  O/eows,  Nov.  29, 1SCO. 

3* 


44 


CAUSE    OF   THE    EEBELLION. 


could  they  any  longer  revere  the  political  maxims  of 
Washington  and  Jefferson,  Madison  and  Henry,  any  more 
than  they  could  regard  with  favor  their  sentiments  upon 
slavery  ?  The  institution  had  become  so  important  in  their 
eyes  that  verily  they  thought  the  whole  country  was  theirs  ; 
that  they  could  take  their  slaves  to  every  State  and  plant 
them  in  every  Territory ;  that  Congress  was  theirs,  that 
the  Presidency  was  theirs,  that  the  Supreme  Court  was 
theirs ;  that,  indeed,  the  whole  people  were  theirs,  with 
the  wealth,  greatness,  prosperity,  and  glory  of  the  nation 
— in  a  word,  that  they  had  made  them  all.* 


*  "  The  unexampled  prosperity  and  growth  of  the  United  States,  have  been  in  exact 
accordance  with  the  development  of  the  slave  population,  the  slave  territory,  and 
the  slave  products,  cotton,  rice,  tobacco,  sugar,  and  naval  stores,  of  the  South." — 
J>r.  Smyth,  of  Charleston,  S.  C.,  in  the  Southern  Presbyterian  Review,  April,  1863. 
Dr.  Palmer,  contrasting  the  North  and  the  South,  speaks  of  "  the  exemplary  patience 
with  which  she  (the  South)  has  endured  a  system  of  revenue  legislation,  flagrantly 
and  systematically  discriminating  against  her,  and  in  favor  of  the  North.  But  the 
abundant  fertility  of  her  soil  has  enabled  her  to  grow  rich,  even  whilst  contributing 
two-thirds  to  the  revenue  of  the  Government." — Ibidem,  April,  1861.  To  show  the 
absurdity  of  Dr.  Palmer's  statement,  we  only  need  to  present  the  official  figures. 
The  "revenue"  raised  from  imports  will  be  a  proper  criterion;  and,  with  the  excep 
tion  of  the  public  lands,  duties  on  foreign  importations  were  almost  the  only  source 
of  "revenue"  to  the  General  Government.  We  do  not  find  in  the  latest  census 
returns  (for  1860)  the  amount  so  stated  as  readily  to  show  what  proportion  was  col 
lected  in  the  Free  States  and  what  in  the  Slave  States;  nor  do  we  find,  in  any  one 
year,  returns  from  all  the  ports  given  in  the  tables.  But  in  Do  Bow's  "  Compendium 
of  the  Seventh  Census,"  the  revenue  for  1853,  collected  from  the  following  ports,  is 
stated.  This  is  probably  a  proper  standard  for  any  year: 


POETS   IN   I 

New  York 

'REE   STATES. 

$38  289  341  58 

PORTS  IN 

New  Orleans 

SLAVE   STATES. 

$2  628  421  32 

7  203  048  52 

886  437  99 

Philadelphia 

4  537,046  16 

Charleston 

432  299  19 

San  Francisco  

1,794,140.68 

St.  Louis 

.  .      294  790.7S 

Portland  

350.349.22 

Savannah 

125,755.86 

251  649  90 

Mobile 

102  981  47 

Oswego 

128  667  27 

73  992  98 

New  Haven  

125,173.40 

Total,  eight  Free 

ports..  $52,  679,4  16.  73 

Total,  nine  Shn 

e  ports....  $4.574.242.77 

PliOOF    THAT   SLAVERY    IS   THE    CAUSE.  45 

When  they  at  length  found  that  the  people  of  the  whole 
l.md  had  become  aroused  by  their  aggressions,  and  in  their 
sovereign  majesty  at  the  ballot-box,  in  November,  1 860, 
pronounced  against  these  extravagant  claims,  they  resolved 
on  rebellion,  in  the  mistaken  interest  of  slavery,  and  be 
lieved  that  they  had  only  to  do  this  to  bring  the  whole 
civilized  world  to  their  feet.  Every  one  who  has  been  a 
close  observer  of  passing  events  in  Church  and  State  for 
twenty  years  past,  well  knows  that  this  is  but  a  true  pic 
ture  of  the  change  which  has  taken  place  in  the  mind  of 
the  extreme  Southern  portion  of  the  country. 

PKOOF  THAT  SLAVERY  IS  THE   CAUSE — OFFICIAL  TESTIMONY. 

It  seems  almost  a  work  of  supererogation  to  set  forth 
the  evidence  of  a  fact  so  well  known,  that  slavery,  in  the 
sense  we  have  explained,  caused  the  rebellion.  Men  might 
as  well  deny  the  testimony  of  their  senses, — which  do 


By  the  same  "  Compendium,11  the  total  of  revenue  collected,  was,  from  "  all  other  dis 
tricts,  $1,678,206.04,"  to  be  divided  between  Free  and  Slave  ports.  It  thus  appears, 
that,  so  far  from  the  Slave  States  "  contributing  two-thirds  to  the  revenue  of  the 
Government,"  they  did  not  contribute  one~tlLirteenth,  according  to  the  above 
returns ;  and  as  De  Bow  was  a  ring-leader  among  the  disunionists,  at  the  very  time 
he  published  this  "  Compendium,"  it  is  probable  that  his  figures  "  don't  lie."  We 
are  of  course  aware  of  the  logic  by  which  Dr.  Palmer's  statement  is  supported  by 
some  writers  (though  he  gives  simply  the  naked  affirmation,  as  quoted),  but  it 
involves  a  greater  absurdity  than  the  statement  itself.  The  revenue  from  foreign 
importations,  comes,  ultimately,  from  the  consumer;  and  it  is  said  that  the  South 
consume  the  vast  amount  of  foreign  goods,  and  therefore  pay  the  mass  of  the  rev 
enue.  It  is  not  so  easy  to  determine  this  by  exact  data  from  figures,  as  it  involves  so 
many  minute  details.  But  when  that  large  class  of  the  "poor  whites"  in  the  Slave 
States  who  never  see,  much  less  wear  or  use  a  dollar's  worth  of  foreign  goods,  is 
deducted  from  those  who  consume  them,  and  then  the  latter  are  compared  with  the 
millions  of  the  vastly  preponderating  population  of  the  Free  States  who  use  foreign 
articles  of  every  description,  it  is  the  most  preposterous  of  all  conclusions, — a  sim 
ple  unaustained  assertion, — to  maintain  that  the  consumption  of  imported  goods  in 
the  Slave  States  comes  within  the  longest  cannon-range  of  the  amount  consumed  in 
the  Free  States.  Dr.  Palmer  is  good  at  the  "  long-bow,"  and  his  unsustained  state 
ment  has  been  so  ofcen  made  that  many,  both  North  and  South,  believe — or  pretend 
to  believe  it. 


46  CAUSE    OF    THE   REBELLION. 

sometimes  deceive  them, — and  it  is  only  because  this  is 
denied  that  we  spend  a  moment  in  collating  the  proof. 

The  seventh  reason  which  Judge  Robertson  assigns  for 
his  position,  that  "  some  of  the  leaders"  in  the  South  Caro 
lina  Convention  "  ridiculed  the  idea"  that  slavery  or  anti- 
slavery  "  was  the  cause  of  their  secession,"  is  plausible, 
and  would  seem  to  be  conclusive,  had  we  not  testi 
mony  which  completely  overwhelms  it.  We  place  over 
against  the  sayings  of  these  men,  whatever  they  may  have 
uttered  in  loose  and  heated  harangues,  the  solemn,  delibe 
rate,  official  act  of  the  Convention  itself,  which  was  passed 
unanimously.  It  sets  forth,  to  use  their  own  words,  "  the 
immediate  causes  which  have  led  to  this  act" — the  seces 
sion  of  the  State.  After  a  long  historical  statement  from 
their  peculiar  stand-point,  and  an  argument  to  show  that 
secession  is  authorized  by  the  Constitution  of  the  United 
States,  they  state  the  grievances  which  have  impelled  them 
to  secede.  There  is  not  a  solitary  allusion  in  the  ordi 
nance  of  secession  to  grievances  on  any  subject  but  slavery. 
But  the  relation  of  the  General  and  State  Governments  to 
that  institution,  and  their  apprehensions  for  the  future, 
they  argue  at  length.  A  sentence  or  two  will  show  their 
position. 

Those  States  (the  non-slaveholding)  have  assumed  the  right  of  decid 
ing  upon  the  propriety  of  our  domestic  institutions;  and  have  denied  the 
rights  of  property  established  in  fifteen  of  the  States  and  recognized  by 
the  Constitution ;  they  have  denounced  as  sinful  the  institution  of  slavery ; 
they  have  permitted  the  open  establishment  among  them  of  societies, 
whose  avowed  object  is  to  disturb  the  peace  and  eloin  the  property  of 
the  citizens  of  other  States.  They  have  encouraged  and  assisted  thou 
sands  of  our  slayes  to  leave  their  homes;  and  those  who  remain,  have 
been  incited  by  emissaries,  books,  and  pictures,  to  servile  insurrection. 
For  twenty-five  years  this  agitation  has  been  steadily  increasing,  until 
it  has  now  secured  to  its  aid  the  power  of  the  common  Government. 
*  *  *  On  the  4th  of  March  next  this  party  will  take  possession  of 


PROOF  THAT  SLAVERY  IS  THE  CAUSE.        47 

the  Government.  It  has  announced  that  the  South  shall  be  excluded 
from  the  common  territory,  that  the  judicial  tribunal  shall  be  made  sec 
tional,  and  that  a  war  must  b&  waged  against  slavery  until  it  shall  cease 
throughout  the  United  States.  The  guarantees  of  the  Constitution  will 
then  no  longer  exist ;  the  equal  rights  of  the  States  will  be  lost.  The 
slaveholding  States  will  no  longer  have  the  power  of  self-government, 
or  self-protection,  and  the  Federal  Government  will  have  become  their 
enemy.* 

WhateATer  may  be  true  about  the  justice  of  these 
charges,  the  proof  is  conclusive,  from  this  official  act,  that 
slavery,  in  its  extravagant  claims  and  unfounded  fears, 
was  at  the  bottom  of  the  secession  of  South  Carolina. 
This  conclusion  cannot  be  avoided,  unless  we  take  the 
ground,  either  that  the  men  of  that  Convention  did  not 
knoic  and  were  unanimously  mistaken  as  to  what  their  own 
complaints  were,  or  that  they  were  utterly  hypocritical  in 
stating  them  and  are  not  to  be  believed  at  all,  and  that  too 
in  a  document  intended  to  vindicate  their  course  before 
the  world. 

The  acts  of  secession,  along  with  the  other  proceedings 
of  the  Conventions  of  the  other  rebel  States,  respectively, 

*  This  ordinance  of  the  South  Carolina  Convention  was  passed  "  by  a  unanimous 
vote  of  one  hundred  and  sixty-nine,"  Dec.  20,  I860.  The  unscrupulous  false 
hoods  solemnly  declared  in  this  official  act,  are  palpable.  The  proof  of  several 
of  them  we  have  already  given.  We  choose  to  speak  plainly,  and  therefore 
say:  It  is  notoriously  FALSE  (1.)  To  charge  the  "non-slaveholding  /States"  as 
a  body  with  any  of  these  things;  (2.)  To  charge  any  one  of  them  upon  the  Fede 
ral  Government;  (3.)  To  charge  that  the  "party"  then  to  come  into  power 
"on  the  4th  of  March,11  had  ever  declared  its  intention  or  assumed  the  right  to 
•wage  war  "against  slavery  until  it  should  cease  throughout  the  United  States;1' 
but  this  "party1'  had  officially  declare-d  jw«2  the  contrary,  and  this  the  South  Caro 
lina  Convention  PERFECTLY  KNEW.  That  official  declaration  is  given  in  a  note  to 
Chapter  I.  Mr.  Lincoln^  letter  accepting  the  nomination  of  this  "party"  for 
the  Presidency,  dated  "May  23,  I860,"  contains  an  explicit  indorsement  of  that 
declaration,  as  follows:  "The  declaration  of  principles  and  sentiments,  which 
accompanies  your  letter,  meets  my  approval;  and  it  shall  be  my  care  not  to  violate, 
or  disregard  it  in  any  part."  This  letter  of  the  Presidential  candidate  of  this 
"  part}-,"  the  members  of  the  South  Carolina  Convention  HAD  SEEN.  They  had, 
therefore,  within  their  own  positive  knowledge,  the  complete  disproof  of  their 
official  charge ;  and  thus  their  falsehood  stands  before  all  men. 


48  CAUSE    OF   THE   REBELLION. 

show  precisely  the  same  cause  for  the  revolt  as  that  assigned 
by  the  Convention  of  South  Carolina, — the  assumed  hos 
tility  of  the  General  Government  to  slavery,  and  the  cor 
responding  sentiments  of  the  people  of  the  North, — and 
there  is  no  other  reason  given  in  any  ordinance  of  secession. 
A  more  recent  and  conclusive  official  testimony  is  found 
in  the  action  of  the  Rebel  Congress,  at  Richmond,  in  an 
"  Address  to  the  People  of  the  Confederate  States,"  issued 
in  February,  1864,  in  which  they  speak  of  the  cause  of 
their  secession,  as  follows : 

Compelled  by  a  long  series  of  oppressive  and  tyrannical  acts,  culmi 
nating  at  last  in  the  selection  of  a  President  and  Vice-President  by  a 
party  confessedly  sectional,  and  hostile  to  the  South  and  her  institutions, 
these  States  withdrew  from  the  former  Union  and  formed  a  new  Con 
federate  alliance,  as  an  independent  Government,  based  on  the  proper 
relations  of  labor  and  capital.  *  *  *  The  Republican  party  was 
formed  to  destroy  slavery  and  the  equality  of  the  States,  and  Lincoln 
was  selected  as  the  instrument  to  accomplish  this  object. 

INDIVIDUAL   WITNESSES   THAT   SLAVERY   IS   THE    CAUSE. 

Besides  this  official  testimony,  many  witnesses  to  the 
same  effect  might  be  cited  from  among  leading  statesmen 
and  divines.  We  give  a  sample  of  this  testimony. 

Alexander  H.  Stephens,  Vice-President  of  the  Southern 
Confederacy,  is  a  representative  man  among  Southern 
statesmen,  and  one  of  the  ablest  of  them  all.  In  his  speech 
at  Savannah,  Georgia,  March  21,  1861,  showing  the  supe 
riority  of  their  Constitution,  he  said  : 

The  new  Constitution  has  put  at  rest  forever  all  the  agitating  ques 
tions  relating  to  our  peculiar  institutions, — African  slavery  as  it  exists 
among  us, — the  proper  status  of  the  negro  in  our  form  of  civilization. 
This  was  the  immediate  cause  of  the  late  rupture  and  present  revolution. 
Jefferson,  in  his  forecast,  had  anticipated  this,  as  the  "  rock  upon  which 
the  old  Union  would  split."  He  was  right.  What  was  conjecture  with 
him  is  now  a  realized  fact.  But  whether  he  comprehended  the  great 
truth  upon  which  that  rock  stood  and  stands,  may  be  doubted.  Tho 


WITNESSES   THAT   SLAVERY    IS   THE    CAUSE.  49 

prevailing  ideas  entertained  by  him  and  most  of  the  leading  statesmen 
at  the  time  of  the  formation  of  the  old  Constitution  were,  that  the  en 
slavement  of  the  African  was" in  violation  of  the  laws  of  nature  ;  that  it 
was  wrong  in  principle,  socially,  morally,  and  politically.  It  was  an  evil 
they  knew  not  how  to  deal  with  ;  but  the  general  opinion  of  the  men  of 
that  day  was,  that,  somehow  or  other,  in  the  order  of  Providence,  the 
institution  would  be  evanescent  and  pass  away.  This  idea,  though 
not  incorporated  in  the  Constitution,  was  the  prevailing  idea  at  the  time. 
The  Constitution,  it  is  true,  secured  every  essential  guarantee  to  the 
institution  while  it  should  last,  and  hence  no  argument  can  be  justly 
used  against  the  constitutional  guarantees  thus  secured,  because  of  the 
common  sentiment  of  the  day.  Those  ideas,  however,  were  funda 
mentally  wrong.  They  rested  upon  the  assumption  of  the  equality  of 
races.  This  was  an  error.  It  was  a  sandy  foundation,  and  the  idea  of 
a  Government  built  upon  it — when  the  "storm  came  and  the  wind  blew 
it  fell."  Our  new  Government  is  founded  upon  exactly  the  opposite 
ideas  ;  its  foundations  are  laid,  its  corner-stone  rests,  upon  the  great  truth 
that  the  negro  is  not  equal  to  the  white  man ;  that  slavery,  subordina 
tion  to  the  superior  race,  is  his  natural  and  normal  condition.  This,  our 
new  Government,  is  the  first,  in  the  history  of  the  world,  based  upon 
this  great  physical,  philosophical  truth. 

The  late  Rev.  Dr.  Thorn  well,  of  Columbia,  S.  C.,  was  one 
of  the  representative  men  of  the  Southern  Church.  In  a 
Fast-Day  Sermon  preached  in  Columbia,  S.  C.,  Nov.  21, 
1860,  upon  "National  Sins,"  occasioned  by  the  then  in 
cipient  troubles  of  the  country,  he  says : 

Let  us  inquire,  in  the  next  place,  whether  we  have  rendered  unto  our 
servants  that  which  is  just  and  equal.  Is  our  legislation  in  all  respects 
in  harmony  with  the  idea  of  slavery  ?  Are  our  laws  such  that  we  can 
heartily  approve  them  in  the  presence  of  God  ?  Have  we  sufficiently 
protected  the  person  of  the  slave  ?  Are  our  provisions  adequate  for 
giving  him  a  fair  and  impartial  trial  when  prosecuted  for  offences  ?  Do 
we  guard  as  we  should  his  family  relations?  And,  above  all,  have  we 
furnished  him  with  proper  means  of  religious  instruction  ?  These  and 
such  questions  we  should  endeavor  to  answer  with  the  utmost  solemnity 
and  truth.  "We  have  come  before  the  Lord  as  penitents.  The  people 
tvhom  we  hold  in  bondage  are  the  occasion  of  all  our  troubles.  We  have  been 
provoked  by  bitter  and  furious  assailants  to  deal  harshly  with  them. 


50  CAUSE    OF   THE    EEBELLION. 

and  it  becomes  us  this  day  to  review  our  history,  and  the  history  of  our 
legislation,  in  the  light  of  God's  truth,  and  to  abandon,  with  ingenuous 
sincerity,  whatever  our  consciences  cannot  sanction. 

Immediately  after  the  secession  of  South  Carolina,  De 
cember  20,  1860,  Dr.  Thornwell  published  an  elaborate 
paper  in  its  defence,  in  the  Southern  Presbyterian  Review. 
In  reference  to  the  justifying  cause  of  secession,  we  take 
from  the  article  the  following  sentences : 

The  real  cause  of  the  intense  excitement  of  the  South  is  not  vain 
dreams  of  national  glory  in  a  separate  confederacy ;  *  *  *  it  is  the  pro 
found  conviction  that  the  Constitution,  in  its  relations  to  slavery,  has  been 
virtually  repealed ;  that  the  Government  has  assumed  a  new  and  dan 
gerous  attitude  upon  this  subject ;  that  we  have,  in  short,  new  terms  of 
union  submitted  to  our  acceptance  or  rejection.  Here  lies  the  evil. 
The  election  of  Lincoln,  when  properly  interpreted,  is  nothing  more  nor 
less  than  a  proposition  to  the  South  to  consent  to  a  government  funda 
mentally  different  upon  the  question  of  slavery  from  that  which  our  fathers 
established.  *  *  *  The  Constitution  covers  the  whole  territory  of  the 
Union,  and  throughout  that  territory  has  taken  slavery  under  the  protec 
tion  of  law.  *  *  *  Let  the  Government  permit  the  South  to  carry  her 
persons  held  to  service,  without  their  consent,  into  the  Territories,  and 
let  the  right  to  their  labor  be  PROTECTED,  and  there  would  be  no  quar 
rel  about  slavery.  *  *  *  We  are  sure  that  we  do  not  misrepresent  the 
general  tone  of  Northern  sentiment.  It  is  one  of  hostility  to  slavery, — 
it  is  one  which,  while  it  might  not  be  willing  to  break  faith,  under  the 
present  Administration,  with  respect  to  the  express  injunctions  of  the 
Constitution,  is  utterly  and  absolutely  opposed  to  any  further  EXTENSION 

OP    THE    SYSTEM.    *   *   *    THE    EXTENSION    OF    SLAVERY,  in    obedience   to 

Northern  prejudice,  is  to  be  forever  arrested.  Congress  is  to  treat  it  as 
an  evil,  an  element  of  political  weakness,  and  to  restrain,  its  influence 
within  the  limits  which  now  circumscribe  it. 

Another  representative  man  among  the  Southern  clergy 
is  the  Rev.  Dr.  Palmer,  also  a  South  Carolinian  by  birth. 
On  the  breaking  out  of  the  rebellion  he  was  pastor  of  the 
First  Presbyterian  Church  in  New  Orleans,  a  post  which 
he  maintained  until  a  little  before  the  recovery  of  that  city 


TESTIMONY    OF    RELIGIOUS    BODIES.  51 

by  the  Union  forces.  On  Thanksgiving  Day,  November 
29, 1860,  he  preached  a  sermon,  entitled,  "  The  South :  Her 
Peril  and  Her  Duty,"  in  which  he  presents  the  grounds 
which  justify  secession.  His  fundamental  proposition  is, 
that  it  is  the  great  "  providential  trust"  of  the  South,  "  to 
conserve  and  to  perpetuate  the  institution  of  slavery  as  now 
existing  f  and  that  it  is 

Our  present  trust  to  preserve  and  transmit  our  existing  system  of 
domestic  servitude,  with  the  right,  unchanged  by  man,  to  go  and  root 
itself  wherever  Providence  and  nature  may  carry  it.  *  *  *  ISTo  man  has 
thoughtfully  watched  the  progress  of  this  controversy  without  being 
convinced  that  the  crisis  must  at  length  come.  *  *  *  The  embarrass 
ment  has  been,  while  dodging  amidst  constitutional  forms,  to  make  an 
issue  that  should  be  clear,  simple,-  and  tangible.  Such  an  issue  is  at  length 
presented  in  the  result  of  the  recent  Presidential  election.  *  *  *  It  is  no 
where  denied  that  the  first  article  in  the  creed  of  the  new  dominant 
party  is  the  RESTRICTION  OF  SLAVERY  WITHIN  ITS  PRESENT  LIMITS.  *  *  * 
The  decree  has  gone  forth  that  the  institution  of  Southern  slavery  shall 
be  constrained  within  assigned  limits.  Though  nature  and  Providence 
should  send  forth  its  branches  like  the  banyan  tree,  to  take  root  in  con 
genial  soil,  here  is  a  power  superior  to  both,  that  sa}rs  it  shall  wither 
and  die  within  its  own  charmed  circle.  *  *  *  IT  is  THIS  WHICH  MAKES 
THE  CRISIS.  Whether  we. will  or  not,  this  is  the  historic  moment  when 
tli,efatti  of  this  institution  hangs  suspended  in  the  balance. 

TESTIMONY    OF     RELIGIOUS    BODIES     TO   THE    SAME    EFFECT. 

All  the  religious  public  bodies  of  the  South,  which  speak 
on  the  subject  at  all,  present  slavery  as  the  cause  of  the 
disruption.  Among  other  numerous  instances,  the  "  Ad 
dress  of  the  General  Assembly  of  the  Presbyterian  Church 
in  the  Confederate  States  of  America,  to  all  the  Churches 
throughout  the  Earth,"  adopted  "unanimously,"  at 
Augusta,  Georgia,  December,  1861,  states  the  matter  as 
follows : 

In  addition  to  this,  there  is  one  difference  which  so  radically  and 
fundamentally  distinguishes  the  North  and  the  South,  that  it  is  becoming 


52  CAUSE    OF   THE    REBELLION. 

every  day  more  and  more  apparent,  that  the  religious  as  well  as  the 
secular  interests  of  both,  will  be  more  effectually  promoted  by  a  com 
plete  and  lasting  separation.  The  antagonism  of  Northern  and  Southern 
sentiment  on  the  subject  of  Slavery  LIES  AT  THE  ROOT  of  all  the  difficulties 
which  have  resulted  in  the  dismemberment  of  the  Federal  Union,  and  in 
volved  us  in  the  horrors  of  an  unnatural  war. 

The  Southern  Baptist  Convention,  a  body  representing, 
as  they  say,  u  a  constituency  of  six  or  seven  hundred  thou 
sand  Christians,"  sitting  in  Savannah,  Georgia,  May  13, 
1861,  "  unanimously"  adopted  a  paper  in  which  they  thus 
refer  to  slavery  as  the  cause  of  disunion  : 

The  Union  constituted  by  our  forefathers  was  one  of  coequal  sovereign 
States.  The  fanatical  spirit  of  the  North  has  long  been  seeking  to  de 
prive  us  of  rights  and  franchises  guaranteed  by  the  Constitution ;  and 
after  years  of  persistent  aggression,  they  have  at  last  accomplished  their 
purpose. 

And  similar  testimony  is  borne  by  all  the  leading  deno 
minations  of  Christians  at  the  South,  which  might  be  given 
did  time  and  space  permit ;  the  purport  of  all  being, — that 
slavery,  its  claims  and  apprehensions,  as  urged  by  the 
Southern  leaders,  caused  the  rebellion.* 

*  Besides  the  proof  given  from  official  sources,  both  secular  and  religious,  and 
from  distinguished  civilians  and  divines,  that  slavery,  in  the  sense  explained,  caused 
the  rebellion,  we  add  the  statements  of  a  few  well-known  public  men  of  the  South 
to  the  same  effect,  out  of  a  thousand  of  a  similar  kind.  Governor  Andrew  Johnson, 
of  Tennessee,  in  a  speech  made  at  Nashville,  in  March,  1862,  is  reported  as  saying  of 
the  rebel  leaders :  "  Look  at  the  hypocrite  Yancey,  telling  Great  Britain  now,  that 
slavery  was  not  the  cause  of  the  war.  They  made  the  slavery  question  the  sole 
pretext  for  their  rebellious  acts."1'  In  an  address  at  Nashville,  June  10, 1864,  Governor 
Johnson  says :  "  I  told  you  long  ago  what  the  result  would  be,  if  you  endeavored  to 
go  out  of  the,  Union  to  save  slavery,  and  that  the  result  would  be  bloodshed,  rapine, 
devastated  fields,  plundered  villages  and  cities;  and  therefore  I  urged  you  to  remain 
in  the  Union.  In  trying  to  save  slavery,  you  killed  it,  and  lost  your  own  freedom." 
Governor  Hamilton,  of  Texas,  in  his  Address  to  the  people  of  that  State,  before  referred 
to,  says  of  slavery :  "  Gathering  temerity  from  its  successful  war  upon  the  rights 
and  lives  of  the  citizens,  it  lifted  its  unholy  hand  to  destroy  the  Government  to 
•whose  protection  it  owed  its  power.  In  its  efforts  to  accomplish  this,  you  have  onl> 
been  considered  as  so  much  material  to  be  used."  Hon.  E.  W.  Gantt,  of  Arkansas, 
who  had  been  a  General  in  the  rebel  army,  in  his  speeches  in  New  York,  Little  Rock, 


TESTIMONY    OF   .RELIGIOUS   BODIES.  53 

It  is  thus  as  clear  as  any  proposition  can  well  be  made, 
from  testimony, — and  the.testimony  of  those  who  ought  to 
know, — that  the  great  underlying  cause  of  all  which 
prompted  the  Southern  rebellion,  was  the  endeavor  to  give 
to  the  institution  of  negro  slavery  greater  security,  expan 
sion,  and  lasting  perpetuity ;  and  the  incitement  to  this 
step  for  these  ends  was  the  hue  and  cry  falsely  raised 
through  the  South,  that  the  incoming  Administration  of 
the  General  Government  was  pledged  to  the  people  who 
had  put  it  in  power,  to  interfere  with  the  constitutional 
rights  of  the  institution,  or  wholly  to  destroy  it. 

Ark.,  and  other  places,  says :  "  What  is  the  cause  of  this  war  ?  We  know  that  there 
is  but  one  disturbing  element  in  the  country.  In  the  South,  where  the  struggle 
commenced,  there  were  but  two  ideas,  and  they  revolved  around  the  negro.  One 
was.  we  should  stay  in  the  Union  to  protect  the  negro ;  the  other  was,  to  go  out,  still 
to  protect  the  negro.  Had  there  been  no  negro  slavery,  there  would  have  been  no 
war.  I  say  so,  because  I  never  saw  any  bitter  contest  in  the  country  that  negro 
slavery  was  not  the  foundation-stone  to.  Let  us,  fellow-citizens,  endeavor  to  be 
calm.  Let  us  look  these  new  ideas  and  our  novel  position  squarely  in  the  face.  We 
fought  for  negro  slavery.  We  have  lost.  We  may  have  to  do  without  it."  Governor 
Bramlette,  in  his  message  to  the  Legislature  of  Kentucky,  says:  "Ambitious  men 
of  the  South,  who  first  sought  to  create  a  sectional  division  upon  the  tariff,  in  order 
to  build  up  a  Government  based  upon  the  aristocracy  of  the  slave-owner,  having 
been  foiled  by  the  incorruptible  patriotism  and  indomitable  will  of  Andrew  Jackson, 
next  gave  and  accepted  a  sectional  quarrel  about  the  slave."  "  The  blinded  ambition 
and  obduracy  of  the  Southern  secessionists,  persistently  thrust  forward  the  slave 
as  the  object  of  strife,  although  the  Administration  and  the  ruling  powers  for  more 
than  one  year  waived  it  aside,  and  refused  to  accept  the  issue."  Hon.  J.  IJ.  Hender 
son  of  Missouri,  in  a  speech  in  the  United  States  Senate,  on  the  7th  of  April  last, 
"  in  favor  of  amending  the  Constitution  so  as  to  abolish  slavery,"  thus  speaks  of  the 
cause  of  the  rebellion:  "Shall  it  be  answered  that  the  South  made  the  war  before 
the  institution  was  attacked,  and  that  their  only  wrong  consists  in  this?  The  Smith 
declares  that  the  rebellion  was  inaugurated  to  protect  slavery  against  No/'thern 
aggression.  Then  the  Northern  Democracy  must  admit,  at  the  least,  that  such  is 
the  character  and  influence  of  the  institution  that  it  drove  the  Southern  people 
into  unnecessary  tear  before  it  wa*  jeoparded  by  the  action  of  the  Government.'1'1 
"The  Union  is  severed  in  the  name  of  slavery.  The  civilized  world  regards  slavery 
as  the  remote  or  proximate  cause  of  the  war."  •*  In  the  interest  of  slavery,  they 
claimed  the  right  to  sever  the  Union.  They  have  done  so,  to  the  extent  of  their 
power."  "If  the  South  be  wrong,  the  wrong  springs,  as  they  say,  from  slavery. 
They  themselves  GIVE  NO  OTHEK  CAUSE  for  their  withdrawal.''''  To  this  testimony 
might  be  added  that  of  the  entire  press  of  the  South,  both  secular  and  religious,  that 
slavery  is  the  grand  underlying  cause  of  the  rebellion. 


54  CAUSE    OF   THE   REBELLION. 


INCIDENTAL    CONFIRMATORY   EVIDENCE. 

A  great  many  other  public  facts  known  to  the  whole 
country  confirm  this  testimony.  Secession  has  been  at 
tempted  by  the  public  authorities,  more  or  less  acting 
together,  in  every  Border  slave  State.  In  Kentucky,  in 
the  year  1861,  a  patriotic  and  determined  Legislature 
prevented  the  disloyal  designs  of  Governor  Magoffin  and 
other  officials.  In  Maryland,  Governor  Hicks,  sustained 
by  certain  Union  Senators,  refused  for  a  long  period  to  call 
a  meeting  of  the  Legislature,  when  it  was  well  known  that 
their  design,  if  assembled,  was  to  pass  an  act  of  secession  ; 
and  when  at  length  the  body  did  meet,  they  were  pre 
vented  from  consummating  such  a  purpose  only  by  the 
prompt  action  of  the  General  Government.  Governor 
Burton  and  other  officials  did  all  in  their  power,  consist 
ent  with  their  personal  safety,  to  carry  out  Delaware. 
Western  Virginia  was  only  saved  to  the  Union  by  a  divi 
sion  of  the  State.  Governor  Jackson,  of  Missouri,  and  the 
disloyal  element  in  the  Legislature,  claimed  to  have  carried 
that  State  into  secession  legally;  at  least  by  a  process 
which  commended  itself  to  their  political  consideration. 
And  thus,  while  every  one  of  the  Slave  States  has  either 
formally  enacted  or  attempted  to  enact  secession,  not  one 
of  the  Free  States  has  made  such  attempt. 

Nor  is  this  all.  Some  of  the  Border  States  which  made 
the  attempt  to  secede, — as  in  the  case  of  Kentucky  and 
Missouri, — pretended  to  organize  regular  State  Govern 
ments,  in  connection  with  the  rebel  Southern  Confederacy, 
and  have  since  continued  such  organizations,  "  dwelling  in 
tents"  and  itinerating  like  menageries,  but  still  claiming 
authority  over  the  territory  of  their  respective  States. 
For  the  past  two  years  or  more,  every  Slave  State  except 
Maryland  and  Delaware  has  been  represented  in  the  rebel 


SLAVE    STATES  CLAIMED    BY  THE    REBEL   PRESIDENT.    55 

Congress.  And  finally,  in  full  accordance  with  these  sig 
nificant  facts,  the  State  papers  and  military  orders  issued 
from  Richmond,  together  with  the  whole  Southern  press, 
have  always  regarded  every  slave  State  as  making  a  part 
of  the  Southern  Confederacy. 

ALL     SLAVE     STATES    OFFICIALLY   CLAIMED     BY    THE    EEBEL 
PRESIDENT. 

Mr.  Davis,  the  rebel  President,  gives,  among  other 
official  proofs,  incidental  evidence  of  the  position  here 
taken,  in  his  specification  of  Kentucky,  when  addressing 
Vice-Presideut  Stephens,  in  July,  1863,  relating  to  his  pro 
jected  visit  to  Washington  on  the  "  Confederate  steamer 
Torpedo."  Mr.  Davis  says : 

The  putting  to  death  of  unarmed  prisoners  has  been  a  just  ground  of 
complaint  in  more  than  one  instance ;  and  the  recent  executions  of  our 
officers  in  Kentucky,  for  the  sole  cause  that  they  were  engaged  in  recruit 
ing  service  in  a  State  which  is  claimed  as  still  one  of  the  United  States, 
but  is  also  claimed  by  us  as  one  of  the  Confederate  States,  must  be  repressed 
by  retaliation  if  not  unconditionally  abandoned,  because  it  would  justify 
the  like  execution  in  every  other  State  of  the  Confederacy. 

This  refers  to  the  spies  executed  by  order  of  General 
Burn  side  in  Kentucky ;  although  that  State,  in  every  popu 
lar  election,  in  some  half  dozen  instances  since  the  rebellion 
began,  has  given  overwhelming  majorities  for  the  Union 
as  against  secession. 

Now,  do  these  uniform,  consistent,  public,  official  acts 
(though  of  course  without  just  authority),  admit  of  any 
other  explanation  than  that  secession  was  undertaken,  and 
that  the  rebellion  has  been  prosecuted  through  every  step 
in  its  progress,  in  entire  subserviency  to  slavery  ?  Their 
pretended  rule  was  only  claimed  to  extend  over  the  slave 
States,  but  yet  over  all  of  them.  All  their  acts  were  marked 
by  a  geographical  line,  and  that  line  bounding  freedom 


56  CAUSE    OF   THE    REBELLION. 

and  slavery.  Their  independence,  from  first  to  last,  they 
have  insisted,  must  be  acknowledged  Jby  granting  to  them 
every  slave  State^  and  their  President,  members  of  Con 
gress,  and  public  journals,  have  constantly  declared  that 
they  will  never  consent  to  peace  on  any  other  terms.* 

It  would  seem  that  no  proposition  was  ever  more  fully 
sustained  by  testimony  of  every  species,  both  positive  and 
negative,  than  that  this  rebellion  has  its  life-spring  in  sla 
very.  To  preserve,  perpetuate,  and  extend  it,  has  animated 
its  civic  councils,  furnished  the  theme  for  the  eloquence  of 
its  pulpits,  given  prowess  to  its  military  leaders,  sustained 
the  heroic  endurance  of  its  soldiery,  and  nerved  to  the  sac 
rifices  and  stimulated  the  prayers  of  its  people.  We  know 
not  what  more  could  be  possibly  added  to  make  out  a 
plainer  case. 

In  regard  to  the  first  six  reasons  presented  by  Judge 
Robertson  to  show  that  protection  to  slavery  could  not 
have  stimulated  "  the  leading  conspirators,"  and  in  which 
he  says  "  they  knew"  this  and  "  they  knew"  that,  we  need 
only  reply  that  sane  men  might  have  seen  and  known  all 
he  states,  of  the  then  past,  present,  and  future.  But  the 
difficulty  with  those  "  leading  conspirators"  was  that  they 
were  not  sane.  They  were  demented.  The  profits,  the 
glory,  and  the  divinity  of  slavery  had  intoxicated  them  to 
frenzy.  They  could  see  nothing  as  it  was.  Our  belief  is 
that  God  had  smitten  them  with  judicial  blindness;  and 
that,  through  their  infatuation,  He  intended  to  accomplish 
for  this  nation  great  purposes  of  His  own — of  which  we 
shall  speak  hereafter.  But  be  this  as  it  may,  no  truth  in 
the  world  is  better  sustained  than  this,  that  slavery,  as 

*  Among  the  "  terms"  of  peace,  on  which  alone  the  Richmond  Enquirer  says  the 
rebels  are  willing  to  negotiate,  this  is  stated :  "  2.  Withdrawal  of  the  Yankee  forces 
from  every  foot  of  Confederate  ground,  including  Kentucky  and  Missouri."  "  The 
North  must  yield  all ;  we  nothing."  These  "  terms,"  in  which  they  claim  all  the 
Slave  States,  are  given  in  full,  in  a  note  to  Chapter  iv. 


UNLIMITED   EXTENSION    OF    SLAVERY.  57 

explained,  is  the  cause  of  the  rebellion  against  the  Gov 
ernment  of  the  United  States. 

UNLIMITED    EXTENSION    OF    SLAVERY. 

But  it  was  not  only  to  preserve  slavery  where  it  was 
established  that  the  rebellion  was  undertaken.  Nor  was 
it,  in  addition,  merely  to  carry  it  into  the  unoccupied  do 
main  of  the  United  States.  Their  scheme  was  much  more 
grand  than  this.  They  aimed  to  build  up  a  great  Slave 
Empire  around  the  Gulf  of  Mexico.  Mexico  and  the  States 
of  Central  America,  now  free,  were  to  be  peopled  with 
negro  slaves ;  and  the  isles  of  the  sea,  now  consecrated  to 
freedom,  were  to  be  re-enslaved ;  and  with  Cuba,  these 
fertile  lands  of  the  tropics,  united  to  the  Southern  States, 
were  to  constitute  the  territory  of  a  nation  whose  "  corner 
stone"  was  to  be  human  bondage. 

The  proof  that  this  was  the  magnificent  plan  contem 
plated,  is  overwhelming.  General  Gantt  refers  to  this  in 
his  speeches,  from  which  we  have  quoted.  It  was  for  this 
he  himself  fought  in  the  rebel  army.  He  says  :  "  I  was  a 
very  good  type  of  a  pro-slavery  man.  I  said,  if  the  Con 
stitution  of  our  fathers  would  not  protect  slavery,  no  guar 
antees  would  do  it.  I  wanted  to  give  that  power  an  expan 
sion,  westward  to  the  ocean,  and  in  another  direction  to 
take  in  Cuba  and  a  part  of  Mexico,  and  all  we  could  get 
beyond" 

Any  one  who  doubts  that  it  was  the  scheme  of  the  lead 
ers  of  the  rebellion  to  extend  slavery  south  and  west  over 
countries  now  free,  "  to  go  and  root  itself,"  in  the  language 
of  Dr.  Palmer,  "  wherever  Providence  and  nature  might 
carry  it,"  and  "  with  the  freest  scope  for  its  natural  devel 
opment  and  extension,"  has  not  had  his  eyes  open  to  cur 
rent  and  notorious  events. 

But  this  is  by  no  means  all.     To  make  this  "  extension" 


68  CAUSE    OP   THE   REBELLION. 

of  slavery  over  so  vast  a  region  either  practicable  or  profit 
able,  another  thing  was  absolutely  essential.  Where  were 
the  slaves  to  come  from  to  occupy  these  immense  domains 
of  the  tropics  ?  or  even  profitably  to  develop  our  own  un 
occupied  Territories,  could  slaves  have  been  brought  into 
them,  or  could  the  South  have  obtained  the  portion  claimed 
by  her  on  "an  equitable  division"  of  the  Union?  The 
answer  to  this  is  easy ;  but  it  is  not  found  where  certain 
"  conservatives,"  so  called,  at  the  North  find  it. 

It  is  one  of  the  curious  things  which  the  discussions  of 
the  times  have  developed,  that  certain  Northern  men  charge 
those  who  would  hinder  the  "  extension"  of  slavery  into 
our  own  free  territory,  with  throwing  obstacles  in  the  way 
of  emancipation;  declaring  that  the  way  to  perpetuate 
slavery  is  to  confine  it  where  it  is,  whereas,  to  allow  it  to 
expand,  according  to  the  wishes  of  its  friends,  is  the 
certain  way  to  promote  emancipation  and  eventually  to 
destroy  it. 

THE    RESTRICTIVE   POLICY. 

Among  those  who  have  taken  this  view  is  Rev.  Dr. 
Samuel  J.  Baird,  of  New  Jersey.  In  his  letter  before 
referred  to,  entitled  "Southern  Rights  and  Northern 
Duties  in  the  present  Crisis,"  he  says  upon  the  point  in 
hand :  "  The  distraction  now  realized  by  our  country,  has 
attained  its  portentous  character  in  consequence  of  two 
assumptions  which  are  both  demonstrably  false."  Our 
present  concern  is  with  only  one  of  these  "assumptions," 
which  he  states  thus  :  "  It  is  assumed  that  the  effect  of  the 
erection  of  new  Slave  States,  is  to  increase  the  amount  of 
slavery  in  the  country."  He  then  proceeds  "  to  state  the 
grounds  upon  which"  he  has  "  long  held  the  opinion,  that 
the  restrictive,  or  free  soil  policy,  so  far  from  tending  to 
the  advantage  of  the  negro,  and  the  extirpation  of  slavery, 


THE    RESTRICTIVE    POLICY.  59 

has  directly  the  opposite  effect, — that  its  influence  is  to 
retard  his  elevation,  and  render  early  emancipation  impos 
sible." 

Dr.  Baird  here  takes  precisely  the  opposite  view  of  the 
"  restrictive"  policy  from  that  taken  by  both  Drs.  Palmer 
and  Thornwell.  The  former,  in  his  Thanksgiving  Discourse, 
before  quoted,  says  :  "  The  decree  has  gone  forth  that  the 
institution  of  Southern  slavery  shall  be  constrained  within 
assigned  limits.  Though  nature  and  Providence  should 
send  forth  its  branches  like  the  banyan-tree,  to  take  root 
in  congenial  soil,  here  is  a  power  superior  to  both,  that 
says  it  shall  wither  and  die  within  its  own  charmed  circle." 
Dr.  Thornwell,  in  his  article  before  referred  to,  says  :  "  The 
extension  of  slavery,  in  obedience  to  Northern  prejudice, 
is  to  be  forever  arrested.  Congress  is  to  treat  it  as  an 
evil,  an  element  of  political  weakness,  and  to  restrain  its 
influence  within  the  limits  which  now  circumscribe  it." 
"  You  may  destroy  the  oak  as  effectually  by  girdling  it  as 
by  cutting  it  down.  The  North  are  well  assured  that  if 
they  can  circumscribe  the  area  of  slavery,  if  they  can  sur 
round  it  with  a  circle  of  non-slaveholding  States,  and  pre 
vent  it  from  expanding,  nothing  more  is  required  to  secure 
its  ultimate  abolition.  '  Like  the  scorpion  girt  by  fire,'  it 
will  plunge  its  fangs  into  its  own  body  and  perish" 

There  seems  to  be,  then,  a  slight  difference  of  opinion 
between  the  New  Jersey  Doctor  and  the  High  Priests  of 
the  Slavery  Propaganda,  as  to  the  effect  of  the  "restrictive" 
policy.  He  thinks,  and  has  u  long  held  the  opinion,"  that 
the  restriction  of  slavery  "would  render  early  emancipation 
impossible;"  they,  that  "nothing  more  is  required  to  se 
cure  its  ultimate  abolition."  We  judge  that  the  Southern 
Doctors  had  the  more  ample  knowledge  and  sounder  view 
of  the  case.  Dr.  Baird  reasons  theoretically,  while  the 
other  gentlemen  reason  practically. 


60  CAUSE  OF  THE  REBELLION. 


THE  EXPANSIVE  POLICY. 

But  our  main  object  in  referring  to  Dr.  Baird  is  to  notice 
the  other  side  of  the  problem ;  to  compare  his  opinion  of 
the  "expansive"  policy  with  the  designs  of  Southern  men. 
We  do  not  aim,  for  want  of  space,  to  give  his  argument, 
but  merely  his  positions.  He  says : 

It  is  true,  as  an  ordinary  rule,  that  dispersion  tends  to  stimulate  the 
increase  of  population  ;  *  *  *  but  it  is  evident  that  this  principle  does  not 
apply,  in  any  appreciable  degree,  to  the  slave  population.  The  respon 
sibility  of  providing  for  the  support  of  the  family  rests  not  on  the  parents 
but  on  the  master.  *  *  *  In  one  word,  the  immediate  effect  of  the  wider 
dispersion  of  a  given  number  of  slaves  is,  to  elevate  and  fit  them  for 
freedom,  and  to  secure  for  them  that  boon,  in  the  surest  and  safest  man 
ner.  *  *  *  As  a  question  of  State  policy,  it  may  be  wise  for  the  North 
ern  States  to  prohibit  the  introduction  of  slaves  from  the  South.  But  as 
a  question  of  national  policy,  a  question  of  humanity  to  the  negro  and 
emancipation  to  the  slave — as  a  question  of  national  strength,  political 
and  military,  no  proposition  is  more  demonstrable  than  that  the  utmost 
possible  dispersion  of  the  slaves  is  the  policy  dictated  by  sound  reason, 
and  approved  by  enlightened  humanity.  It  may  be  objected  that  the 
"  curse  of  slavery"  ought  not  to  be  inflicted  on  the  Territories.  Waiving 
all  cavil  as  to  the  phrase,  it  would  seem  that  true  patriotism  must  have 
at  least  as  great  concern  for  the  welfare  of  the  people  of  the  South  as  for 
the  trackless  wilds  of  the  "West. 

The  point  here  made  is,  that  the  wider  the  "  dispersion" 
of  the  slaves,  permitting  the  "  extension"  of  the  system 
into  all  the  Territories  as  the  South  demanded,  would  tend 
to  "  emancipation,"  and  be  the  proper  "  policy"  for  all  who 
desired  that  end  to  advocate;  just  as  the  "restrictive" 
policy  would  tend  to  perpetuate  the  system.  Does  Dr. 
Baird  then  suppose  that  this  was  the  motive  the  South  had 
in  view  when  demanding  admission  into  the  Territories'? — 
that  this  was,  with  them,  a  measure  of  "  emancipation  ?"- 
and  that  being  refused,  they  sought  to  get  out  of  the  Union  ? 


REOPENING    OF   THE    SLAVE-TRADE.  61 

Or,  if  this  was  not  their  direct  motive,  does  he  suppose  that 
they  were  not  quite  as  well  able  to  determine  the  "  effect" 
of  opening  the  Territories  to  slavery,  as  himself? — that 
they  could  not  see  whether  such  a  course  would  promote 
"  emancipation"  or  not  ?  Is  it  not  at  least  highly  prob 
able,  that,  as  he  is  proved  by  Southern  testimony, — from 
those  who  "  live,  and  move,  and  have  their  being,"  in  tho 
atmosphere  of  slavery, — to  be  in  error  about  the  "  restric 
tive,5'  so  also  he  may  be  about  the  "dispersive"  policy? 
We  would  not  call  in  question  the  correctness  of  his  rea 
soning,  in  its  general  application,  upon  the  "  increase  of 
population,"  under  the  aspects  of  the  respective  policies  of 
a  scattered  or  crowded  condition ;  but  it  does  not  cover 
the  present  case.  We  shall  see  this  when  we  understand 
the  ultimate  designs  of  the  South  concerning  this  question 
of  "  dispersion"  through  the  Territories. 

REOPENING   OF   THE    AFRICAN    SLAVE-TRADE. 

There  is  too  much  known  for  doubt,  that  it  was  the  ulti 
mate  plan  of  the  rebel  leaders  to  fill  up  the  Territories, 
could  they  have  free  access  to  them,  with  slaves  from  the 
Old  States,  and  to  supply  their  places  Avith  fresh  importa 
tions  from  Africa,  or  introduce  those  newly  imported  into 
both,  as  occasion  might  require. 

They  were  to  clamor  for  a  repeal  of  the  la\v  prohibiting 
the  African  slave-trade  as  "piracy,"  and  in  case  of  failure 
were  to  evade  it,  or  to  pursue  the  traffic  openly  in  spite  of 
it,  as  was  done  in  the  case  of  the  slaver  Wanderer  and 
others,  that  brought  cargoes  into  Southern  ports  and  sold 
and  dispersed  them  through  the  Southwest  a  few  years 
ago.  Prosecutions  against  them  would  fail,  as  they  did 
fail  in  some  of  these  cases,  because  Southern  Courts  were 
corrupted  by  the  prevailing  opinion. 

Thus,  the  "  effect"  pointed  out  by  Dr.  Baird  of  opening 


62  CAUSE    OF    THE    HEUELLION. 

the  Territories  to  slavery,  would  not  he  to  elevate  the  ne 
gro  and  Ultimately  to  emancipate  him  through  the  policy 
of  "  dispersion  ;"  but  an  expansion  and  perpetuation  of  the 
system  on  new  ground,  by  new  recruits  from  Africa,  w::s 
the  grand  design  of  the  rebel  leaders.  In  case  the  war 
against  this  course  should  become  too  hot,  or  they  should 
not  gain  access  to  the  Territories,  the  plan  was  to  go  out 
of  the  Union,  build  up  a  Slave  Empire  around  the  Gulf  of 
Mexico,  and  people  the  fair  regions  of  Central  America  with 
their  newly-caught  victims. 

REOPENING  OF  THE  TRADE  DENIED. 

When  this  project  of  reopening  the  African  slave-trade  is 
charged,  it  is  by  some  denied,  even  despite  of  the  fact  that 
it  was  actually  in  progress  against  all  the  po\ver  of  Ameri 
can  courts  of  law,  and  American  and  English  fleets  on  the 
African  coast.  The  fact  which  is  often  appealed  to  as  per 
fectly  conclusive,  is,  that  the  rebel  Constitution,  adopted 
at  Montgomery,  specially  prohibited  the  opening  of  that 
traffic.  But  the  power  that  made  that  instrument  could 
change  it,  and  undoubtedly  would  do  so  at  the  proper  time. 
That  prohibition  was  inserted  manifestly  for  two  reasons  : 
to  conciliate  the  Border  States  which  had  slaves  to  sell, 
and  to  conciliate  European  Powers  whose  favor  they 
wished  to  gain.  It  certainly  was  not  inserted  because  of 
any  opposition  to  the  traffic  in  itself  considered,  either  on 
the  ground  of  principle  or  policy.  Such  a  supposition 
would  belie  the  well-known  sentiments  of  the  leading 
spirits  among  its  framers. 

Even  the  good  and  great  Dr.  Thornwell,  while  denying 
that  the  desire  for  reopening  the  trade  was  a  cause  of  the 
disruption,  does  not  condemn,  but  rather  palliates,  if  he  does 
not  actually  approve,  the  traffic  in  itself  considered,  and 
when  properly  conducted.  He  is  rather  facetious,  and 


REOPENING  OF  THE  TEADE  DENIED.  '        03 

seems  to  think  that  those  at  the  South  who  have  advocated 
it,  have  done  it  simply  for  the  purpose  of  "  teasing  their 
enemies"  and  "providing  hard  nuts  for  abolitionists  to 
crack."  We  shall  soon  see  whether  this  is  true.  In  the 
mean  time,  hear  Dr.  Thorn  well,  in  the  same  article  before 
referred  to : 

It  has  also  been  asserted,  as  a  ground  of  dissatisfaction  with  the 
present  Government,  and  of  a  desire  to  organize  a  separate  Government 
of  their  own,  that  the  cotton-growing  States  are  intent  upon  reopening, 
as  a  means  of  fulfilling  their  magnificent  visions  of  wealth,  the  African 
slave-trade.  The  agitation  of  this  subject  at  the  South  has  been  griev 
ously  misunderstood.  *  *  *  They  wished  to  show  that  they  could 
give  a  Rowland  for  an  Oliver.  Had  abolitionists  never  denounced  the 
domestic  trade  as  plunder  and  robbery,  not  a  whisper  would  ever  have 
been  breathed  about  disturbing  the  peace  of  Africa.  The  men  who  were 
loudest  in  their  denunciations  of  the  Government,  had,  with  very  few 
exceptions,  no  more  desire  to  have  the  trade  reopened  than  the  rest  of 
their  countrymen :  but  they  delighted  in  teasing  their  enemies.  They 
took  special  satisfaction  in  providing  hard  nuts  for  abolitionists  to 
crack. 

Dr.  Thornwell  thus  resolves  the  whole  thing  into  ajoke; 
regards  the  utterances  of  the  leading  spirits  in  Southern 
Commercial  Conventions,  and  the  deliberate  resolves  of 
those  bodies  for  many  years,  with  the  advocacy  of  leading 
Southern  papers  and  periodicals, — coming  from  the  Yan- 
ceys,  the  Rhetts,  the  De  Bows,  and  their  colaborers,  the 
very  men  who  at  length  wielded  power  to  carry  the  whole 
eleven  States  into  that  very  rebellion  which  he  defends 
with  his  powerful  pen, — as  evincing  nothing  more  serious 
than  the  employment  of  their  pastime  in  a  little  innocent 
"  teasing."  If  he  himself  is  serious,  we  pity  his  incredu 
lity.  The  proof  is  too  full  to  admit  of  a  doubt  among 
common  men.  But  why  should  he  present  this  caveat  at 
all  9 — especially  in  the  face  of  abundant  testimony  ?  He 
seems  to  have  no  objection  to  the  reopening,  on  the  ground 


64  CAUSE    OF   THE    REBELLION. 

of  any  wrong  in  the  traffic  ;  nor,  according  to  him,  does 
any  one  else  in  the  South.  The  only  thing  is  to  see  that 
it  is  well  conducted.  Hear  him  : 

There  were  others,  not  at  all  in  favor  of  the  trade,  who  looked  upon 
the  law  as  unconstitutional  which  declared  it  to  be  piracy.  But  the 
great  mass  of  the  Southern  people  were  content  with  the  law  as  it  stood. 
They  were  and  are  opposed  to  the  trade, — not  because  the  traffic  in 
slaves  is  immoral, — that,  not  a  man  of  us  believes, — but  because  the 
traffic  with  Africa  is  not  a  traffic  in  slaves.  It  is  a  system  of  kidnap 
ping  and  man-stealing,  which  is  as  abhorrent  to  the  South  as  it  is  to  the 
North. 

If  then  it  could  be  divested  of  some  of  its  odious  fea 
tures,  it  would  all  be  right !  But  even  if  "  the  great  mass 
of  the  Southern  people"  were  against  the  African  slave- 
trade,  we  only  need  to  bear  in  mind  that  so  also  they  were 
against  disunion  until  led  astray  by  demagogues  in  Church 
and  State ;  and  as  "  the  men  who  were  loudest  in  their 
denunciations  of  the  Government,"  and  finally  led  the  peo 
ple  into  rebellion,  were  the  very  men  who  were  for  open 
ing  the  slave-trade,  so,  we  may  reasonably  suppose,  they 
would  eventually  have  been  equally  successful,  under  the 
new  Government,  in  carrying  "  the  great  mass"  with  them 
in  favor  of  the  latter  scheme. 

PROOF  OF  THE  DESIGNED  OPENING  OF  THE  TRADE. 

Let  us  now  see  what  evidence  there  is  that  it  was  a 
part  of  the  plan  of  disunion  to  reopen  the  African  slave- 
trade. 

De  Bow's  Review,  an  able  commercial  periodical  pub 
lished  at  New  Orleans  before  the  rebellion,  was  an  acknowl 
edged  organ  of  the  rebel  leaders,  and  an  oracle  on  all  sub 
jects  connected  with  their  movements.  For  several  years 
it  had  openly  advocated  the  reopening  of  the  trade,  and 
some  of  its  articles  made  this  a  sine  gua  non  with  the 


PBOOF  OF  THE  DESIGNED  OPEXIXG  OF  THE  TRADE.  05 

South  for  remaining  in  the  Union.  Its  editor,  Mr.  J.  D. 
B.  De  Bow,  Superintendent  of  the  Census  Bureau  under 
President  Pierce,  and  many  of  his  correspondents,  wrote 
in  favor  of  the  project.  Almost  every  number  had  some 
thing  upon  it.  We  can  only  give  a  specimen  of  this  liter 
ature.  The  first  citation  is  found  in  the  number  for  No 
vember,  1857,  in  an  article  advocating  a  "  Central  South 
ern  University,"  to  educate  young  men  in  the  political 
views  peculiar  to  the  South ;  and  as  a  reason  for  showing 
its  necessity,  the  writer  thus  speaks  of  American  and  Euro 
pean  views  of  slavery  and  the  slave-trade  : 

These  fifteen  hireling  States,  together  with  all  the  rest  of  North 
America,  except  the  slaveholding  States  mentioned,  and  more  than  one- 
half  of  South  America,  reinforced  and  sustained,  by  England,  France, 
and  most  of  the  other  nations  of  Europe,  have  openly  declared  them 
selves  against  American  slavery,  and  may  be  said  to  be  engaged  in  a 
crusade  against  our  domestic  institutions.  The  African  slave-trade  has 
been  denounced  as  piracy,  not  only  by  several  European  powers,  but 
by  the  United  States.  From  the  beginning  of  the  present  century  up  to 
this  time,  the  influence  of  the  Government  has  been  against  the  South  ;* 
and  for  fifteen  years  this  Government  has  kept  a  fleet  on  the  African 
coast  for  the  express  purpose,  acting  in  conjunction  with  England  and 
France,  of  suppressing  the  traffic  in  slaves,  and  for  preventing  their 
importation  into  America.  And  at  least  three-fourths  of  the  expense 
of  maintaining  this  fleet  have  been  paid  by  the  South.  *  *  *  The 
difficulty  between  the  South  and  the  North  can  never  arrive  at  a  peaceable 
settlement.  The  supreme  and  ultimate  arbiter  in  the  dispute  now  pend 
ing  between  them  must  be  the  sword.  To  that  complexion  it  must  come 
at  last. 

The  foregoing  is  mild  compared  with  what  follows  from 
the  number  for  December  of  the  same  year.  The  article 
is  upon  the  "  Wealth  of  the  North  and  the  South :  the 

*  And  yet,  from  the  facts,  and  the  testimony  of  the  rebel  Vice-President,  it 
appears  that  the  Government  was  controlled  by  "  the  South"  and  its  Northern 
"allies,"  sixty-four  out  of  seventy-two  years  from  its  origin.  This  is  shown  in 
Chapter  I. 


60  CAUSE    OF   THE    REBELLION. 

Slave-Trade  and  the  Union."     Speaking  of  the  North,  the 
writer  says  : 

Her  industrious  and  enterprising  population,  her  commercial,  manu 
facturing,  and  mechanical  skill,  her  fine  harbors,  her  fisheries,  and  her 
Union  with  and  vicinity  to  the  South,  are  the  true  sources  of  her  pros 
perity.  A  revival  of  the  African  slave-trade  at  the  South,  would  furnish 
her  with  cheaper  raw  materials,  cheaper  provisions,  and  extend  and 
improve  the  market  for  her  commerce,  merchandise,  and  manufactures. 
This  is  probably  the  only  measure  that  can  save  the  Union.  It  will  meet 
with  some  opposition  from  a  FEW  inconsiderate  Southern  slaveholders, 
because  it  will  lessen  the  price  of  slaves  and  of  slave  products.  But  it 
will  greatly  increase  the  price  of  Southern  lands,  half  of  which  are  now 
lying  waste  and  useless  for  want  of  labor,*  whilst  Christendom  is  almost 
starving  from  the  deficiency  of  Southern  products.  Such  a  step  would 
give  political  security  to  the  South,  because  it  would  identify  still  more 
closely  the  interest  of  ALL  SECTIONS  in  upholding  and  increasing  Slavery. 
Texas  would  speedily  be  settled,  and  Kentucky,  Virginia,  'Tennessee, 
Missouri,  and  Maryland,  with  slaves  at  two  hundred  dollars  around, 
would  bring  all  their  now  vacant  lands  into  successful  cultivation.  It 
is  most  probable  that  New  York,  Pennsylvania,  and  the  whole  Northwest, 
WOULD  ALSO  BECOME  SLAVEHOLDER  with  slaves  at  two  hundred  dollars. 
EVENTS  ARE  TENDING  THIS  WAY.  *  *  *  It  is  our  true  interest  to 
secure  and  preserve  the  monopoly  of  cotton  production,  and  we  can 
effect  this  only  by  the  renewal  of  the  slave-trade.  It  is- highly  credita 
ble  to  the  much  abused  "extremists  of  the  South,"  that  they,  with  a  few 
exceptions,  and  their  press,  are  the  most  prominent  advocates  of  the  revi 
val  of  the  slave-trade,  which  in  a  pecuniary  way  most  of  them  think 
injurious  to  themselves.  But  they  are  patriots,  and  ready  to  make  great 
sacrifices  to  preserve  peace  and  Union.  *  *  *  Is  it  possible  to  con 
ceive  that  THE  NORTH  will  not,  when  it  surveys  the  whole  ground  in 
controversy,  ADVOCATE  THE  RENEWAL  OP  THE  OLD  SLAVE-TRADE  as  a 
measure  of  humanity,  as  well  to  the  idle,  savage,  pagan  negroes,  as  to 
the  starving,  laboring  whites  of  Europe  and  the  North  ?  *  *  *  All 
sections  have  confidence  in  the  present  Administration,  but  let  it  go  out 

*  What,  then,  we  would  ask  Dr.  Baird  and  others  who  agree  with  him,  could 
the  South  do  with  the  Territories,  except  to  introduce  slaves  from  Africa,  if  "half 
of  the  "Southern  lands"  in  1857  were  "lying  waste  and  useless  for  want  of  labor?"' 
Nothing,  clearly,  unless  on  his  principle  they  wished  to  promote  "  emancipation" 
by  "dispersion." 


PKOOF  OF  THE  DESIGNED  OPENING  OF  THE  TKADE.      67 

of  power — and  '•  then  the  deluge."  Mr.  Buchanan  will  be  the  "last  of 
the  Presidents,"  unless  abolition  is  arrested  in  its  course,  and  some  mea 
sure,  some  line  of  policy  adopted,  which  shall  plainly  and  obviously 
make  the  extension  of  Slavery  the  interest  of  the  North.  *  *  *  An 
exasperated  South  will  blow  the  Union  to  shivers,  if  hordes  of  Northern 
immigrants  continue  to  seize  upon  and  monopolize  the  whole  of  that 
territory,  which  she,  the  South,  chiefly  acquired,  despite  of  much  North, 
era  opposition.  The  revival  of  the  African  slave-trade,  the  reduction  in 
the  price  of  negroes,  and  the  increase  of  their  numbers,  will  enable  us 
successfully  to  CONTEND  IN  THE  SETTLEMENT  OF  NEW  TERRITORIES  with 
the  vast  emigration  from  the"  North.  NOTHING  ELSE  CAN.  IT  is  THE 
ONLY  HE  AS  CRE  THAT  CAN  PRESERVE  THE  UNION.  *  *  *  Let  her  (the 
Northj  examine  the  subject  calmly,  historically,  religiously,  morally, 
statistically,  and  philosophically,  and  she  will  find  the  proposed  proce 
dure  quite  as  humane  as  profitable.  If  this  does  not  satisfy  her,  calcu 
late  the  costs  and  consequences  of  disunion,  for  it  has  come  to  this — 

EITHER  A  RENEWAL  OF   THE    SLAVE-TRADE,  OR    DISUNION.       There    Can  be 

no  drawn  battle  between  abolition,  and  slavery  and  the  slave-trade. 
Truth  will  prevail.  One  or  the  other  must  conquer.  God  defend  the 

right. 

We  give  but  one  more  specimen,  taken  from  the  same 
periodical,  De  .Bow's  JReview  for  May,  1859  : 

How  often  have  we  been  told  from  our  legislative  halls,  that  Con 
gress  has  no  power  or  jurisdiction  over  slavery,  as  it  exists  in  the 
United  States — that  each  one  of  the  States  is  sovereign,  and  competent 
to  manage  its  own  internal  affairs.  How  comes  it  then,  we  ask,  that 
Congress  has,  for  so  many  years,  legislated,  and  entered  on  her  rolls, 
laws  expressly  prohibiting  the  slave-trade,  and  entering  into  compact  with 
foreign  nations  with  force  of  arms  to  suppress  it?  *  *  *  Where  is  the 
propriety  or  fitness  or  evenness  in  action,  to  send  a  United  States  Mar 
shal  to  aid  in  the  recapture  of  a  runaway  slave  in  any  of  the  mis 
called  free  States,  and  at  the  same  time  having  a  fleet  on  the  African 
coast  to  intercept  and  suppress  it  altogether?  If  any  one  can  solve 
this  riddle,  why  then  we  confess  he  is  more  shrewd  than  we  are,  and 
most  cheerfully  resign  to  him  the  palm  of  victory  in  discrimination. 
*  *  *  Was  not  the  seizure  and  capture  and  confiscation  of  the  brig 
Echo,  a  direct  preventive  of  the  people  of  a  certain  latitude  from  the 
use  of  that  kind  of  laborers  only,  and  property  suitable  to  their  climate, 
4* 


68  CAUSE    ©F    THE    KEBELLION. 

soil,  and  production  ?     *     *     *     Ever  since  the  time  that  Congress  first 
took  action  to  suppress   the  slave-trade,  AT  THAT  CRISIS   AND  MOMENT 

WERE    SOWN   THE   SEEDS   OF   DISUNION 

THE  CAUSE  FULLY  DEVELOPED. 

We  now  see  the  ultimate  purposes  sought  to  be  accom 
plished  by  the  rebel  leaders.  We  are  now  ready  to  draw 
the  grand  conclusion  as  to  the  cause  of  the  rebellion.  We 
are  able,  somewhat,  to  approach  to  an  adequate  concep 
tion  of  the  enormity  of  that  wickedness,  to  perpetrate 
which,  through  treason,  fraud,  war,  and  carnage,  ministers 
of  the  Gospel  and  Christian  Churches,  with  oihers, — as 
we  shall  see  further  on  in  these  pages, — gave  their  personal 
and  official  influence  at  an  early  stage  in  this  drama  of 
blood,  and  in  some  instances  took  the  lead  in  counsel  and 
action,  and  have  been  its  most  ardent  supporters  to  the 
present  hour.  We  see  the  special  end  to  be  reached  by 
an  overthrow  of  the  Government  of  th,«  United  States, 
and  the  building  up  of  another  nation  in  its  stead,  upon 
such  a  "  corner-stone"  as  no  other  nation,  according  to 
Mr.  Stephens,  ever  rested  upon  "in  the  history  of  the 
world." 

The  project  was  grand.  The  means  were  appropriate. 
The  conception  was  worthy  of  the  greatest  intellects  and 
the  largest  hearts.  We  seriously  doubt  whether  any  other 
people  but  "  our  Sonthren  brethren"  could  have  compassed 
it.  It  was  not  merely  to  perpetuate  a  system  of  human 
bondage  which  was  the  scorn  of  the  whole  Christian  world 
outside  of  the  immediate  region  in  which  it  was  upheld; 
not  merely  to  preserve  for  themselves  and  transmit  to 
their  children  the  status  of  slavery  as  it  existed  among 
them;  but  it  was  to.  inaugurate  and  consummate  a  great 
system  of  Slavery  Propagandise!,  and  that  not  merely 
upon-  the  virgin  soil  of  the  Territories;  these  modem 


THE  CAUSE  FULLY  DEVELOPED.  69 

Apostles  were  to  carry  their  missionary  enterprise  into  the 
Free  States ;  "  New  York,  Pennsylvania,  and  the  whole 
Northwest,"  were  among  the  first  benighted  regions  that 
were  to  be  visited;  and  "  with  slaves  at  two  hundred  dol 
lars"  a  head,  every  farmer  could  become  a  gentleman  of 
leisure,  with  an  abundance  of  laborers  to  till  his  grounds. 
To  realize  these  glowing  visions  of  wealth  and  the  otium 
cum  dignitate,  the  slave-marts  of  Africa  were  to  be  again 
thrown  wide  open,  and  "all  sections"  were  to  go  in  for 
"  the  revival  of  the  slave-trade."  Dr.  Thorn  well  and  other 
leading  clergymen  would  approve  of  the  traffic,  and  de 
fend  it  in  the  Religious  Reviews,  as  De  Bow  had  long 
done  in  his  Commercial  Review,  if  it  could  only  be  divested 
of  some  of  its  repugnant  adjuncts;  and  for  the  sake  of 
enlisting  their  vigorous  pens  this  could  easily  be  done,  or 
at  least  easily  promised. 

And  why  should  not  all  hands  at  once  join  in  this,  and 
all  become  rich  together? — and  why  should  we  not,  too, 
"  as  a  measure  of  humanity"  when  appealed  to  "  calmly, 
historically,  religiously,  morally,  statistically,  and  philo 
sophically  ?"  And,  above  all,  we  are  appealed  to  patrioti 
cally.  If  we  do  not  join  in  this  grand  religious  and  politi 
cal  regeneration  of  our  country  and  the  rest  of  mankind,  "  an 
exasperated  South  will  blow  the  Union  to  shivers"  and 
set  up  for  themselves ;  "  for  it  has  come  to  this — either  a 
renewal  of  the  slave-trade,  or  disunion."  But  they  do  not 
wish  to  do  so  bad  a  thing — oh,  no  !  "  They  are  patriots, 
and  ready  to  make  great  sacrifices  to  preserve  peace  and 
Union !" 

As,  then,  the  "  renewal  of  the  old  slave-trade"  is  the 
"  only  measure  that  can  preserve  the  Union,"  the  responsi 
bility  of  its  preservation  is  upon  the  North.  Why  will 
she  not  step  forward  and  sign  the  bond  ?  Who  can  hesi- 
tnte  when  such  interests  are  in  the  trembling  balance  ?— 


70  CAUSE    OF   THE   KEBELLION. 

wealth,  ease,  religion,  humanity,  patriotism,  Union,  and 
universal  slavery  ;  all  made  sure  forever,  with  "  the  price 
of  negroes  at  two  hundred  dollars"  a  head  ! 

Another  idea  looms  up  under  all  this  which  certain 
moralists  should  ponder,  and  correct  their  logic.  They 
have  said  all  along  that  it  was  the  "Abolitionists"  who 
had  bred  all  the  trouble,  and  finally  brought  disunion. 
But  leathern  take  a  lesson  here  from  their  Southern  teach 
ers.  /  It  was  not  the  Abolitionists  at  all ;  not  even  the 
more  moderate  opponents  of  slavery ;  but  it  was  op 
position  to  the  slave-trade  which  at  the  very  first  threat 
ened  to  destroy  the  Union,  just  as  a  refusal  to  reopen  it 
has  led  to  its  actual  disruption. ;  The  Southern  oracle 
says :  "  Ever  since  the  time  that  Congress  first  took  action 
to  suppress  the  slave-trade,  at  that  crisis  and  moment 
were  sown  the  seeds  of  disunion."  A  truce  then  to  this 
war  upon  the  Abolitionists.  The  "  seeds  of  disunion" 
were  sown  before  they  were  out  of  their  teens. 

But  to  look  at  the  matter  "  calmly,"  as  we  are  exhorted 
to  do  :  the  AMERICAN  PEOPLE  may  here  behold  the  sump 
tuous  repast  to  which  they  were  sincerely  and  soberly 
invited  by  the  leading  spirits  of  the  South,  the  men  who 
controlled  public  opinion  there,  and  were  successful  in 
precipitating  the  rebellion.  Nothing  short  of  consenting 
to  these  demands  could  have  satisfied  them.  If  the  North 
had  been  ready  for  this  humiliation,  the  Union  and  the 
Government  could  have  been  saved  and  peace  maintained. 
But  in  no  possible  way  could  war  have  been  avoided  with 
out  this,  except  upon  a  complete  abandonment  of  their 
ground  by  the  South.  That  ground  they  would  not  aban 
don, — and  hence  the  rebellion. 


RESPONSIBILITY   FOB   THE   REBELLION.  71 


CHAPTER  III. 

RESPONSIBILITY  FOR  THE   REBELLION. 

As  in  regard  to  the  cause  of  the  rebellion,  so  also  as  to 
the  responsibility  for  it,  there  has  been  a  wide  diversity 
of  opinion.  While  the  former  is  too  plain  to  admit  of 
doubt,  there  appears  to  be  more  plausible  ground  for  dif 
ference  about  the  latter ;  and  yet,  laying  aside  prejudice, 
the  facts  seem  to  place  this  also  within  the  pale  of  com 
plete  moral  certainty. 

It  has  been  very  freely  charged,  and  is  still,  by  many  in 
the  loyal  States,  that  the  abolitionists  have  brought  all 
the  troubles  upon  the  country,  have  provoked  the  South  to 
rebel,  and  are  therefore  responsible  for  the  war  and  all  its 
consequences.  Another  class  divide  the  responsibility 
about  equally  between  the  abolitionists  and  secessionists. 
Still  another  class  charge  the  whole  responsibility  upon 
the  rebels,  insisting  that  whatever  grievances  they  may 
have  had,  real  or  imaginary,  they  were  not  justified  in 
seeking  to  redress  them  by  revolution. 

Few  questions,  either  political  or  moral,  connected  with 
the  contest,  can  be  more  important  than  this ;  important  as 
affecting  the  interests  of  the  country  at  large ;  important 
in  the  eyes  of  the  nations  of  the  world,  and  in  the  judg 
ment  which  posterity  will  form  ;  as  well  as  important,  offi 
cially  and  personally,  to  the  rulers,  and  the  leaders  of  parties, 
both  North  and  South,  and  to  every  individual  who  has 
given  aid  on  either  side,  in  however  small  a  degree ;  and 
not  only  important  for  the  life  that  no\v  is,  but  in  reference 


72  RESPONSIBILITY   FOE   THE   REBELLION. 

to  that  account  which  all  must  render  to  God  when  He 
shall  make  inquisition  concerning  the  responsibility  for  hav 
ing  plunged  thirty  millions  of  people,  in  a  Christian  land, 
into  a  war  which  has  in  its  bearings  and  magnitude  no 
parallel  in  history.  No  question,  therefore,  deserves  to  be 
approached  with  more  candor  and  examined  more  dispas 
sionately. 

ABOLITIONISTS    CHARGED   WITH   THE    RESPONSIBILITY. 

On  this  point  we  refer  again  to  the  papers  of  Judge 
Robertson ;  chiefly  because  he  represents  an  extensive 
class.  He  condemns  the  secessionists  unsparingly,  but  he 
holds  the  abolitionists  largely  responsible  for  the  woes 
which  have  befallen  the  land.  He  says  :  "  For  that  per 
nicious  ferment,  abolitionists  are  primarily  and  pre-emi 
nently  accountable,  and  are,  therefore,  justly  chargeable 
witfi  a  large  share  of  the  responsibility  for  all  the  conse 
quences  ;  for,  had  there  been  no  abolitionism,  there  would 
have  been  no  secession  yet,  if  ever,  and  had  there  been  no 
secession  there  would  have  been  no  war.  He  plainly 
does  not  mean  by  "  abolitionists"  those  who  are  simply 
emancipationists,  or  opposed  to  slavery,  as  nearly  the 
whole  North  and  many  in  the  Border  slave  States  are  ; 
for,  he  says,  even  of  himself:  "I  am  not,  nor  ever  was, 
proslavery  in  feeling  or  in  principle ;  I  would  delight  to 
see  all  men  free."  By  "  abolitionists"  he  means  those  of 
the  Garrison  and  Phillips  school ;  for  in  the  same  article 
he  describes  them  thus  :  "  Abolitionists,  it  is  true,  have 
complained  of  the  Constitution  as  c  a  league  with  hell,' 
only  because  it  tolerates  and  protects  slavery  in  the  slave- 
holding  States  ;  and  this  pestilent  band  of  fanatics  and 
demagogues  have,  for  thirty  years,  been  plotting  a  disso 
lution  of  the  Union  as  the  only  or  most  speedy  and  sure 
means  of  abolishing  slavery." 


FALLACIOUS    REASONING    TO    SUSTAIN   THE    CHARGE.    73 

By  this  description  the  Judge  means  by  "  abolitionists" 
those  whom  the  country  commonly  accept  under  this 
designation,  headed  by  Garrison,  Phillips,  and  their  coad 
jutors,  some  of  whom  have  heretofore  joined  with  their 
opposition  to  slavery,  opposition  to  the  Sabbath,  the  min 
istry,  the  Church,  and  the  Bible.  He  quotes  one  of  their 
pet  phrases  which  shows  that  he  means  them.  We  enter 
no  defence  of  this  class,  as  abolitionists.  We  have  always 
been  opposed  to  their  schemes  and  to  the  spirit  by 
which  they  seem  to  have  been  actuated.  We  make  these 
quotations,  however,  and  we  remark  upon  them,  for  the 
purpose  of  endeavoring  to  determine  where  the  real  re 
sponsibility  we  are  seeking  lies.  We  believe  in  giving 
"  the  devil  his  due,"  and  even  William  Lloyd  Garrison 
and  his  associates  are  entitled  to  at  least  that  measure  of 
consideration.  As  we  totally  disagree  with  the  eminent 
jurist  in  locating  this  responsibility,  we  cannot  refrain 
from  a  vindication  of  these  men,  so  far  as  the  charge  is 
concerned,  that  they  are  "primarily  and  pre-eminently 
accountable"  for  the  rebellion  and  the  horrors  of  the  war. 
We  not  only  deny  the  allegation,  and  shall  give  ample 
evidence  to  sustain  the  denial,  and  show  where  the  respon 
sibility  lies,  but  we  are  amazed  at  the  reasoning  by  which 
the  Judge  would  sustain  the  charge,  though  we  have  fre 
quently  met  with  the  like  before. 

FALLACIOUS  REASONING  TO  SUSTAIN  THE  CHARGE. 

Iii  the  first  place,  we  do  not  see  why,  in  the  chain  of 
sequences  which  the  Judge  employs,  he  should  either 
begin  or  end  just  where  he  does.  His  point  is,  that  the 
abolitionists  are  responsible  for  the  war ;  "  for,  had  there 
been  no  abolitionism,  there  would  have  been  no  secession 
yet,  if  ever,  and  had  there  been  no  secession  there  would 
have  beeu  no  war." 


74  RESPONSIBILITY    FOR   THE    REBELLION. 

Why  may  we  not,  with  equal  cogency,  so  far  as  the  logic 
of  the  case  is  concerned,  begin  with  at  least  one  prior 
step  ? — thus :  "  Had  there  been  no  slavery,  there  would 
have  been  no  abolitionism,"  &c.     The  case  admits  of  this, 
beyond  question.     The  proposition   is  logically  true,  and 
true  in  fact.     Abolitionism,  whether  right  or   wrong,  is 
aimed  only  at  slavery,  and  could  not   exist  without  it. 
They  have  lived  side  by  side,  and  they  will  die  together. 
Nor  is  there  any  logical  necessity  for  beginning  with  this 
one  prior  step.      With  perfect  truth,  we  may  reason  thus  : 
"  Had  there  been  no  sin  there  would  have  been  no  slavery." 
And    the    chain   might    be    extended  further.      But  the 
position  of  slavery  in  this  longer  chain  is  not  only  logically 
correct,  but  it  is  so  in  morals ;    and  this,  too,  whether 
slavery  is  a  sin  per  se  or  not.     It  is,  at  the  very  least,  the 
fruit  of  sin,  as  all  classes  admit,  and  one  of  the  palpable 
signs  of  a  fallen  race.     The  ablest  defenders  of  slavery  as 
a  divine  institution,  declare  it  to  have    originated  in  a 
"  curse"  inflicted  for  sin,  and  to  be  one  of  its  most  striking 
badges ;    and  all  this,  while  arguing  that  in  these  latter 
days  it  has  been  transmuted  into  a  u  blessing"  to  all  con 
cerned,  political,  social,  and  moral,  by  a  sort  of  metaphy 
sical  alchemy  in  which  its  defenders  are  peculiarly  skilled. 

THEY    WOULD    DISCUSS    THE    SUBJECT. 

But  in  the  next  place,  passing  by  the  logic  of  this  pas 
sage,  there  is  a  moral  aspect  which  the  case  suggests  be 
yond  that  which  we  have  incidentally  stated.  Remarkably 
few,  taking  the  general  judgment  of  Christendom,  agree 
with  the  men  of  the  extreme  South  in  their  modern  views 
of  slavery.  With  a  unanimity  that  has  few  parallels,  it  is 
regarded  as  an  evil,  political  and  social;  and  by  great 
numbers,  as  a  sin.  Whether  they  are  right  or  wrong  in 
th<>ir  judgment  is  not  now  material ;  they  claim  the  right 


ABDUCTION    Cl'1    SLAVES.  75 

to  discuss  the  question.  It  is  idle  to  tell  men  in  our  coun 
try  that  they  shall  not  dis.cuss  any  question  of  morals,  poli 
tics,  or  religion.  It  cannot  be  prevented.  There  is  neither 
authority  nor  power  to  prevent  it ;  and  we  trust  it  will 
never  be  attempted,  unless  the  liberty  of  speech  or  of  the 
press  shall  be  abused  *to  the  injury  of  individuals  or  of 
society. 

Now  it  is  notorious  that  the  head  and  front  of  the  offence 
committed  by  the  class  of  whom  Judge  Robertson  speaks,  is 
that  they  would  discuss  the  question  of  slavery  ;  or,  if  the 
term  suits  any  better,  that  they  would  "  agitate"  the  sub 
ject.  They  had,  us  all  the  world  knows,  a  peculiar  way  of 
their  own  ;  but  if  they  transgressed  no  law,  that  pecu 
liarity  was  a  part  of  their  right.  They  called  hard  names, 
and  unnecessarily  stirred  up  bitter  feelings.  In  this  they 
committed  an  offence  against  good  taste  and  Christian  pro 
priety,  and  we  have  always  disapproved  of  their  course. 
But  that  they,  in  common  with  all  men,  had  a  perfect  right 
to  discuss  the  subject  to  their  hearts'  content,  all  must 
admit.  If  discussion  disturbed  slavery,  as  it  is  universally 
conceded  it  did, — and  must  necessarily  do  so.  however  con 
ducted, — it  was  one  of  the  misfortunes  of  the  institution 
which  from  its  nature  could  not  be  avoided,  and  for  which 
it  was  alone  responsible.  And  it  will  be  seen  in  the  sequel, 
that  here  is  where  the  great  "  grievance"  lies,  when  the 
case  is  sifted  to  the  bottom.  Mankind  would  discuss  the 
merits  of  slavery.  Hence  the  germ  of  Southern  dissatis 
faction. 

ABDUCTIOX    OF    SLAVES. 

But  the  abolitionists  are  charged  with  doing  far  worse 
than  discussing  the  subject.  It  is  said,  they  stole  Southern 
property ;  when  fugitive  slaves  were  pursued,  they  made 
open  resistance  to  the  laws;  and  finally, their  schemes  cul- 


70  RESPONSIBILITY   FOE   THE    REBELLION. 

minated  in  the  John  Brown  raid.  We  shall  not  defend 
any  of  these  things.  We  have  always  condemned  them. 
We  have  advocated  in  the  pulpit,  in  a  Northern  State, 
obedience  to  the  laws,  active  or  passive,  the  Fugitive  Slave 
Law  included,  specifying  it  by  name,  and  have  condemned 
mob  violence,  and  our  views  have  heretofore  been  pub 
lished.  We  should  take  the  same  course  with  regard  to 
any  properly  enacted  law,  without  regard  to  its  character. 
We  know  of  no  other  course  which  a  Christian  can  justly 
take. 

But  suppose  it  be  admitted  that  the  abolitionists  did  all 
that  is  here  charged,  what  does  it  amount  to  as  justifying 
or  even  extenuating  this  gigantic  rebellion  ?  South  Caro 
lina  formally  presents  in  her  "  Declaration  of  Causes  which 
induced  the  Secession"  of  the  State,  and  as  "justifying"  it, 
this  spoliation  of  her  slave  property ;  and  yet,  South  Caro 
lina,  as  the  men  of  her  Convention  must  have  known  from 
the  statistics  extant,  suffered  very  little  in  this  regard, 
and  even  less  than  any  other  State.  All  the  seceded 
States  suffered  comparatively  little,  and  those  most  noisy 
about  secession  least  of  all,  from  their  geographical  posi 
tion  ;  while  the  Border  States,  from  which  the  largest 
number  escaped,  were  content  to  remain  in  the  Union,  and 
condemned  in  not  very  measured  terms  the  course  of  the 
States  farther  South.  This  complaint  of  the  rebel  States, 
of  the  loss  of  their  property,  when  presented  to  justify 
either  secession  or  rebellion,  is  too  well  known  to  be  the 
most  shallow  and  hypocritical  of  all  false  pretences. 

THE    WHOLE    NORTH    CHARGED    WITH    IT. 

The  attempt  has  been  made  to  implicate  the  mass  of  the 
Northern  people  in  these  breaches  of  the  law  and  good 
faith  towards  the  South.  Certain  newspapers,  North  and 
South,  have  rung  with  such  charges,  and  certain  Northern 


ABOLITIONISTS    NOT   REPUBLICANS.  77 

and  many  Southern  orators  in  Congress  have  made  them. 
But  their  falsity  is  obvious.  No  evidence  has  ever  been 
found  to  sustain  them,  even  after  the  most  diligent  search. 
It  was  charged,  for  example,  that  the  whole  North  aided 
and  abetted  John  Brown  ;  or,  at  least,  as  was  again  said, 
the  whole  Republican  party ;  or,  with  still  another  abate 
ment,  certainly  the  leaders  of  that  party,  though  in  the  face 
of  their  positive  denials.  Senator  Mason,  of  Virginia,  was 
so  sure  of  his  game  that  he  called  ion  a  Committee  of  the 
United  States  Senate,  "  with  full  power  to  send  for  persons 
and  papers,"  to  investigate  the  subject.  Pie  was  promptly 
accommodated,  and  was  made  chairman.  After  a  long 
research  without  let  or  hindrance,  and  with  all  the  power 
of  a  willing  Administration  to  aid  him,  he  made  a  report 
and  asked  for  the  Committee's  discharge.  He  found 
nothing — and  reported  it. 


ABOLITIONISTS   NOT   REPUBLICANS. 

In  regard  to  the  abolitionists,  who  are  held  "  primarily 
and  pre-eminently  accountable"  for  the  horrors  of  this 
rebellion,  it  is  well  known  that  they  have  ever  formed  a 
remarkably  small  fraction  of  the  community,  and  that  their 
influence  with  the  mass  of  the  people  has  been  insignifi 
cant.  They  have  never,  in  any  Presidential  election,  as  a 
party,  acted  with  the  Republican  party,  but  have  opposed  it 
with  violence  and  bitterness,  always  having  their  own  can 
didate.  Since  the  rebellion  has  been  in  progress,  the  leaders 
of  that  faction  have  sometimes  been  found  supporting  the 
Government  and  sometimes  abusing  it ;  according  to  our 
observation,  most  commonly  the  latter.  Wendell  Phillips, 
the  most  renowned  orator  among  them,  has  frequently,  and 
of  late,  denounced  the  President  by  name,  and  the  Adminis 
tration,  for  the  policy  pursued  in  conducting  the  war,  and 


78  RESPONSIBILITY   FOB   THE    REBELLION. 

he  has  publicly  identified  himself  with  a  party  opposed 
to  Mr.  Lincoln's  re-election. 

But  granting  all  that  may  with  truth  be  said  of  these 
men,  their  numbers  and  influence  have  always  been  so 
small  in  the  country,  that  it  is  perfectly  preposterous  to 
hold  them  "  primarily  and  pre-eminently  accountable"  for 
the  war  and  its  consequences.  Or,  granting  that  the  ut 
most  that  has  been  charged  upon  this  class  is  true  to  the 
letter, — yea,  and  that  vastly  more  than  is  charged  specifi 
cally,  is  true  of  them, — yet,  it  cannot  before  God,  nor  will 
it  before  candid  men,  be  deemed  sufficient  to  justify,  or  in 
the  least  possible  degree  to  extenuate,  an  open  and  bloody 
revolution  against  the  General  Government.  And  although 
it  may  be  urged  against  the  Garrison  and  Phillips 
school  that  they  for  many  years  strived  to  divide  the 
Union, — and  they  freely  admit  the  charge,  at  least  their 
leaders, — their  weapons  were  the  tongue  and  the  pen. 
They  never,  as  a  party,  put  themselves  in  battle  array  to 
overthrow  the  Government,  seizing  the  ships,  mints,  cus 
tom-houses,  and  forts  of  the  Government,  and  using  them 
in  a  bloody  contest  for  its  destruction.  These  memorable 
deeds  were  left  for  the  Southern  chivalry, — "our  Southern 
brethren," — and  for  the  sake  of  slavery. 

ABOLITIONISTS    COMPLIMENTED THE    PEOPLE    DISPARAGED. 

But  do  serious  people  see  the  bearing  of  such  a  charge  ? 
In  holding  the  Abolitionists  responsible,  do  they  perceive 
what  power  over  twenty  millions  of  people  in  the  Free 
States  they  ascribe  to  the  merest  fraction  of  the  popula 
tion? 

Here  is  a  small  body  of  persons,  led  by  some  half  a 
dozen  orators,  male  and  female,  who  have,  within  a  few 
years,  by  meetings,  speeches,  and  publications, — all  peace 
ful  and  legitimate  means  under  a  free  Government, — put 


ABOLITIONISTS    COMPLIMENTED.  79 

forth  their  sentiments  on  a  given  subject,  and  have  pro 
duced  one  of  the  most  astounding  revolutions  in  human 
history  in  the  sentiments  of  an  enlightened,  educated,  and 
religious  people ;  leading  this  people,  to  such  an  expression 
of  opinion  at  the  ballot-box,  as  is  deemed  a  solemn  politi 
cal  judgment  on  one  of  the  mightiest  questions  of  State 
which  ever  affected  any  people  resulting  in  so  disaffect- 
ing  another  portion  of  the  same  nation,  in  population 
relatively  not  more  than  one-third  of  the  whole  number, 
as  to  induce  them  to  take  up  arms  to  "  recover  their 
rights,"  and  to  induce  the  majority  also  to  take  up  arms 
to  maintain  that  political  judgment;  and  thus  exhibiting 
to  the  world  one  of  the  greatest  and  most  bloody  wars 
ever  known  among  men.  All  this  is  charged  upon  this 
"  contemptible  faction,"  as  it  is  called  ;  but  by  no  means 
contemptible,  if  the  charge  is  true. 

While  this  "faction"  was  engaged  in  this  work,  they 
were  opposed,  in  both  sections  of  the  nation  thus  affected 
by  them,  by  the  much  larger  portion  of  the  "  fourth 
estate,"  the  press,  secular  and  religious,  daily,  wreekly, 
and  periodical ;  they  were  covered  with  reproach,  and  the 
most  opprobrious  epithets  of  the  English  language  were 
heaped  upon  them,  by  orators  in  Congress  and  among  the 
people,  by  the  press,  and  by  all  the  usual  appliances  for 
affecting  public  opinion.  During  all  the  earlier  period  of 
their  career,  they  were  frequently  assailed  with  other 
weapons ;  showered  with  rotten  eggs,  their  meetings 
broken  up  by  mobs,  their  public  halls  burned,  ordinary 
places  for  popular  assemblages  denied  them,  their  printing- 
presses  broken  and  their  offices  sacked  and  burned ;  and 
if  one  of  them  chanced  to  be  found  South  of  a  certain  line 
of  latitude,  or  a  person  who  was  no  more  than  "  suspected" 
of  being  one  of  them,  a  coat  of  tar  and  feathers  was  the 
least  compliment  paid  him ;  and  if  his  visit  was  welcomed 


80  RESPONSIBILITY    FOR    THE    REBELLION. 

with  whipping  or  hanging,  it  was  deemed  no  more  than 
was  deserved  for  such  sentiments  and  conduct  as  he  was 
"  reasonably  suspected"  of  entertaining. 

Beyond  this,  tho  mass  of  the  religious  portion  of  the 
nation  was  against  them,  and  had  no  manner  of  sympathy 
with  or  for  them.  The  pulpits  belonging  to  the  larger  part 
of  the  various  denominations  were  opposed  to  them, 
whether  any  thing  was  preached  in  that  line  or  not.  The 
pulpits  they  controlled,  or  even  had  access  to,  were  re 
markably  small  in  number.  In  the  religious  bodies  of 
every  Church, — Conventions,  Associations,  Conferences, 
and  General  Assemblies, — resolutions  were  passed  against 
them,  again  and  again.  To  be  known  as  an  "  Abolitionist," 
or  to  be  branded  as  such,  whether  justly  or  otherwise,  was 
enough  to  shut  a  man  out  of  the  social  circle,  and  out  of 
the  sympathy  of  religious  men  and  religious  bodies,  in 
many  places  where  the  cue  was  given  to  the  habits  and 
usages  of  the  higher  grades  of  society;  while  "dis 
tinguished  consideration,"  with  more  than  a  diplomatic 
significance,  was  often  shown  at  the  North  to  men  who 
were  identified  with  Southern  institutions,  and  simply 
because  they  were  so  identified. 

All  this  is  well  known  to  the  world.  And  yet,  this  "  vile 
faction,"  in  the  face  of  such  opposition,  and  with  the 
simplest  means,  has  revolutionized  a  mighty  nation ;  has 
led  even  the  mass  of  the  people  who  have  been  their  re- 
vilers  to  sustain  the  Government  in  now  at  length  vindica 
ting  those  sentiments,  and  sustaining  by  a  powerful  array 
of  armies  that  cause,  for  the  whole  origin  of  which  they  are 
held  responsible.  This  is  the  aspect  whicli  the  charge 
puts  on,  from  the  lips  of  those  who  make  it,  when  it  is  con 
fronted  with  the  facts.  What  power  wielded  by  a  "  con 
temptible  faction,"  thus  to  take  twenty  millions  of  enlight 
ened  people  by  the  nose  and  mould  them  as  though  they 


RKPONSIBILITY    OF    ABOLITIONISTS.  81 

were  but  a  nose  of  wax !  Did  the  world  ever  see  the  like 
before,  except  under  Jesus  of  Nazareth  and  the  twelve 
fishermen  of  Galilee  ?  Either,  then,  it  must  be  admitted 
that  it  was  the  ideas  which  this  "faction"  propagated 
which  have  done  the  work, — horrible  as  those  ideas 
were  held  to  be,— or  we  must  look  elsewhere  for  the 
responsibility  for  the  revolution  through  which  we  are 
passing.* 

RESPONSIBILITY    OF   ABOLITIONISTS    DISCLAIMED    AT   THE 
SOUTH. 

It  is  well  to  note,  that  the  more  considerate  among  the 
advocates  and  apologists  of  the  rebellion,  even  at  the 
South,  in  Church  or  State,  do  not  hold  the  Abolitionists 
responsible,  as  furnishing  in  their  conduct  the  justifiable 
ground  for  secession.  Take  one  example,  from  the  South- 


*Here  is  a  recent  charge  of  the  responsibility  upon  the  abolitionists,  from  one  of 
the  most  influential  secular  prints  of  the  country,  illustrating  and  sustaining  what 
is  said  above.  It  is  one  of  a  thousand  similar  cases.  The  New  York  Herald,  of 
July  16,  1864,  closes  an  article  upon  "  The  Truth  of  History,''  thus : 

"  The  abolition  agitators  did  cause  the  rebellion  at  the  South  ;  for  they  gave  the 
rebel  leaders  the  only  pretext  they  needed  to  fire  the  Southern  people  and  drag  them 
into  civil  war.  The  fire-eaters  tried  to  raise  a  rebellion  on  the  tariff  question;  but 
the  people  would  not  revolt.  Then  Greeley,  Garrison,  and  the  other  abolitionists 
deliberately  set  to  work  to  drive  the  South  out  of  the  Union.  This  has  been  con 
fessed  by  Greeley,  by  Garrison,  and  by  Wendell  Phillips,  all  of  whom  were  original 
disunionists.  Greeley  wrote  the  first  article  in  favor  of  secession  that  appeared  in  a 
Northern  paper ;  Wendell  Phillips  delivered  the  first  speech  in  favor  of  the  rebel  con 
federacy  from  a  Northern  rostrum.  Garrison  declared  that  he  trampled  upon  the 
infamous  Constitution.  The  rebel  leaders  simply  took  advantage  of  the  utter 
ances  of  these  abolitionists  to  coax  and  frighten  the  people  of  the  South,  into 
treason.  They  used  the  weapons  with  which  Northern  fanatics  supplied  them. 
They  employed  the  arguments  which  Greeley  and  his  colleagues  furnished  them. 
They  worked  in  concert  with  the  abolitionists,  and  for  the  same  traitorous  end. 
When  South  Carolina  seceded,  Greeley  and  Wendell  Phillips  raised  howls  of  joy, 
which  were  only  silenced  by  fears  of  the  consequences  when  Northern  patriots 
began  to  arm  themselves  against  the  rebels.  This,  we  assert,  is  the  exact  truth  of 
history.  If  Greeley?s  history  asserts  any  thing  different  it  is  a  false  and  lying  book, 
and  if  General  McClellan  is  abused  for  stating  these  facts  he  is  abused  for  speaking 
the  truth,  and  Greeley  knows  it." 


82  RESPONSIBILITY   FOE   THE    REBELLION. 

ern  Presbyterian  Review,  April,  1861,  where  the  grounds 
of  secession  are  argued  at  length,  and  justified.  This  is  a 
fair  specimen  of  the  view  taken  by  the  more  calm  and 
reflecting  portion  of  the  rebel  leaders  : 

Let  us  proceed  to  the,  second  question  :  Why  do  the  cotton-growing 
States  desire  to  secede  ?  What  reasons  have  induced  them  to  brave  all 
the  real  difficulties,  and  all  the  possible  dangers  of  secession  ?  Among 
the  reasons  assigned  by  the  Princeton  writer,  only  one  is  true,  and 
that  one  is  stated  as  it  never  entered  the  mind  of  any  Southern  man, 
living  or  dead,  and  could  not,  therefore,  be  subjectively  a  motive  for 
their  conduct.  The  fierce  ravings  of  the  Abolitionists  have  not  caused  the 
secession  of  the  Southern  States.  This  has,  for  many  years,  been  a  great 
annoyance ;  but  it  could  hardly  be  called  a  grievance.  The  wild  outcries 
of  the  Abolitionists  have  excited  very  various  emotions  in  the  breasts  of 
different  Southern  men.  Some  have  been  aroused  to  anger  and  scorn ; 
others  have  been  amused;  while  those  who  agree  with  the  Princeton 
Eeview,  that  their  language  and  spirit  are  execrably  wicked,  have 
heard  them  more  in  sorrow  than  in  anger.  They  have  felt  that  the  dan 
ger  to  be  feared  was  for  those  in  whose  hearts  these  fierce  fires  were 
burning,  and  by  whose  lips  such  words  of  blasphemy  were  uttered. 
The  high-spirited  and  fiery  Southerners,  as  they  are  called,  have  borne 
for  thirty  years  all  that  the  fanatics  could  say,  and  they  might  very 
well  have  endured  it  a  little  longer.  The  proceedings  of  the  incendiaries 
sent  to  the  South  to  entice  the  slaves  to  abscond,  or  to  stir  them  up  to 
revolt  and  massacre,  have  not  caused  the  secession  of  the  Southern  States. 
This  is  undoubtedly  a  very  great  grievance,  but  by  no  means  so  formi 
dable  as  the  people  of  the  North  generally  suppose. 

As  this  disclaimer  comes  from  a  high  source  in  the 
Presbyterian  Church  at  the  South,  and  undoubtedly  repre 
sents  the  sentiment  of  leading  Southern  men, — ex 
cept  among  noisy  politicians,  who  had  sinister  ends  to 
gain  by  giving  the  abolitionists  a  prominence, — we  ask  for 
it  the  particular  attention  of  a  large  class  at  the  North 
(of  whom  Rev.  Drs.  Nathan  L.  Rice,  of  New  York,  and 
Samuel  J.  Baird,  of  New  Jersey,  are  a  good  type  among 
clergymen,  and  embracing  also  the  editorial  corps  of  the 


RESPONSIBILITY    OF    ABOLITIONISTS.      .  83 

major  portion  of  the  religious  press,  weekly  and  quarterly), 
who  have  wasted  much  time  in  trying  to  convince  the  pass 
ing  generation  of  mortals,  that,  among  Northern  men,  the 
abolitionists,  and  others  whom  they  have  stigmatized  and 
misnamed  such,  have  been  the  great  fomenters  of  discord 
between  the  North  and  the  South  ;  predicting  that  their 
course  would  at  length  bring  the  country  into  open  conflict ; 
and,  therefore,  holding  them  now  chiefly  responsible  for  a 
fratricidal  war.  The  world  well  knows  how  persistently 
such  declamation  has  been  uttered  for  many  years  past. 
But  the  most  serious-minded  men  of  the  South  openly  deny 
this.  They  **  hardly"  regard  such  opposition  to  slavery  as 
a  "  grievance,"  in  the  manner  in  which  they  have  most  com 
monly  waged  it.  The  real  cause  of  their  secession  is  quite 
another  thing ;  in  a  word,  the  unwillingness  of  the  whole 
people  of  the  North  and  the  National  Government  to  yield 
to  their  exorbitant  demands. 

And  here  is  just  where  Judge  Robertson  and  others 
make  a  serious  mistake  in  interpreting  the  sayings  of 
certain  men  in  the  South  Carolina  Convention.  They 
deny  that  the  "  ravings  of  the  abolitionists"  had  disturb 
ed  them  seriously,  just  as  the  writer  in  the  Review  we 
have  quoted  does.  But,  at  the  same  time,  they  present 
the  feet  that  the  Northern  people  and  Government  AS  A 
WHOLE  were  against  them ;  that  is,  could  not  agree  in  ad 
mitting  "  their  rights"  upon  the  slavery  question  to  the 
full  extent  to  which  they  demanded  them;  and  hence 
they  were  determined  to  remain  in  the  Union  with  them 
no  longer. 

Instead  of  the  abolitionists  being  held  to  the  responsi 
bility  for  what  has  occurred,  so  far  as  the  revolt  has  any 
extenuation  in  the  conduct  of  Northern  men,  it  may  yet  be 
found  that  the  chief  responsibility  rests  upon  quite  another 
class ;  upon  many  of  those  who  have  been  the  loudest  in 
5 


84  .    RESPONSIBILITY    FOR    THE    REBELLION. 

their  denunciations  of  them,  and  who  are  ranked  as  lead 
ing  men  in  the  Church  and  in  the  State. 

DISCUSSION    THE    GERM    OF    THE    TROUBLING    ELEMENT. 

The  real  difficulty,  so  far  as  irritating  the  South  is  con 
cerned,  was  far  more  wide-spread  than  any  thing  which 
could  be  charged  upon  the  abolitionists.  It  was  not  so 
much  that  they  would  "  agitate"  and  act  in  their  peculiar 
way,  as  it  was  that  any  action  whatever  should  be  taken 
upon  slavery.  That  man  has  been  a  poor  observer  of  events 
who  does  not  know  that  the  offensive  manner  of  dealing 
with  the  question  was  not  the  thing  which  gave  the  South 
uneasiness.  It  certainly  was  not,  so  far  as  the  religious 
portion  of  the  community  was  concerned.  It  was,  rather, 
the  discussion  of  the  subject  at  all,  in  any  manner,  in  any 
place,  and  by  any  persons.  It  had  come  to  be  fashionable 
to  regard  any  entertainment  of  the  subject  as  "  agitation," 
and  the  term  "  abolitionist"  was  freely  applied  in  order  to 
frown  down  the  most  respectful  inquiry.  It  had  not  been 
possible  for  many  years  to  introduce  the  subject  into  any 
of  the  large  religious  bodies  in  which  men  of  the  extreme 
South  were  members,  without  giving  mortal  offence,  and 
leading  to  threats  of  ecclesiastical  secession.  The  pleas 
against  it  were  specious  and  plentiful,  and  somewhat  con 
tradictory.  The  matter  had  been  "  acted  upon  and  settled" 
by  the  Church,  and  therefore  should  be  "  let  alone."  It 
was  a  "  political  question,  with  which  the  Church  has  noth 
ing  to  do,"  and  therefore  should  not  be  introduced.  It 
was  a  u  troublesome  subject,  and  would  rend  the  Church 
asunder."  These  and  many  more  reasons  were  given; 
while  Southern  extremists,  who  would  keep  the  subject 
out  of  the  Church  lest  the  Church  should  he  defiled  by  its 
examination,  were  ever  contending  that  it  was  an  institu 
tion  sanctioned  and  regulated  by  the  word  of  God.  Any 


DISCUSSION    THE    TROUBLING    ELEMENT.  85 

form  of  its  consideration,  by  the  most  serious  minded  men, 
except  in  the  favoring  interest  of  slavery,  was  stigmatized 
as  "  wicked  agitation."  Nothing  but  utter  silence  upon  the 
question,  unless  in  its  favor,  was  pleasing  to  the  class  of 
slavery  propagandists.  We  speak  from  personal  knowledge 
and  extended  observation,  and  declare  only  what  is  noto 
rious. 

At  the  very  same  time,  the  South  was  teeming  with  pub 
lications,  the  newspaper,  the  sermon,  the  pamphlet,  the 
quarterly  and  the  octavo  volume,  put  forth  by  her  ablest 
writers,  her  Thorn  wells  and  Palmers,  her  Hammonds  and 
Cobbs,  her  Elliotts  and  Bledsoes,  her  Armstrongs  and 
Smylies,  statesmen,  lawyers,  divines,  vying  with  each 
other  to  sanctify  and  glorify  the  system  of  Southern  bond: 
age  as  a  "  blessing,"  socially,  politically,  religiously  ;  while, 
in  perfect  accord  with  all  this,  in  the  North  were  found 
apologists  and  defenders  of  the  system  from  the  same 
classes  and  professions,  and  through  the  same  means  ;  and 
yet,  many  of  these  Northern  men  were  ready  to  raise  the 
hue  and  cry  of  "  agitation"  and  "  abolitionism"  if  any  thing 
were  said  against  the  system,  unless  it  were  emasculated  of 
all  the  pungency  and  pith  which  would  give  it  force.  In 
a  word,  although  discussion  was  feared  as  a  fiend,  it  could 
be  tolerated,  and  even  applauded,  provided  it  were  on  the 
right  side.* 


*To  give  an  illustration  of  what  some  great  men  thought  about  discussion  on  this 
subject,  and  how  it  could  be  disposed  of,  we  refer  to  the  proposition  of  a  distin 
guished  statesman.  In  the  early  part  of  1S61,  soon  after  the  secession  of  South  Caro 
lina,  when  many  men  in  the  Border  States  were  striving  to  produce  a  "  reconciliation 
between  the  North  and  the  South,"  the  Hon.  John  P.  Kennedy,  of  Baltimore,  pub 
lished  a  pamphlet,  entitled.  "  The  Border  States  :  Their  Tower  and  Duty,"  &c.  He 
gives  a  series  of  propositions  which  the  Border  States  should  submit  to  the  two 
sections,  and  among  them  this  about  discussing  the  subject  of  slavery:  "Finally, 
•a  pledge  to  be  given  by  the  free  States  to  exert  their  influence,  as  far  as  possible, 
to  discourage  discussions  of  slavery  in  a  tone  offensive  to  the  interests  of  the  slave- 
holding  States."  The  alternative,  on  the  failure  of  the  proposed  negotiations,  is  thus 


86  RESPONSIBILITY    FOR    THE    REBELLION. 

It  is  a  notorious  fact,  as  regards  the  great  body  of  the 
people  of  the  United  States  who  were  in  principle  opposed 
to  slavery,  that  the  utmost  they  did  to  manifest  their  oppo 
sition  was  to  discuss  and  determine  its  merits  ;  and  this 
they  felt  bound  to  do,  especially  in  consequence  of  its  more 
recent  and  extravagant  claims.  The  measure  of  their  re 
sponsibility  for  the  rebellion  and  the  war  is  thus  easily 
gauged.  It  is  equally  notorious,  that  this  discussion,  and 
the  conclusions  formed  concerning  the  system,  were  the 
chief  things  which  gave  the  concocters  of  the  rebellion 
mortal  offence.  Their  responsibility  is  thus  just  as  easily 
determined.  Who,  then,  are  responsible  for  this  heritage 
of  Woes  ?  Must  the  South  bear  it  all  ?  Is  the  North  to 
bear  no  share  of  it  ? 


presented:  "But  in  the  adverse  event  of  these  stipulations,  or  satisfactory  equiva 
lents  for  them,  being  refused,  the  Border  States  and  their  allies  of  the  South  who 
may  be  disposed  to  act  with  them,  will  be  forced  to  consider  the  Union  impractica 
ble,  and  to  organize  a  separate  Confederacy  of  the  Border  States,  with  the  associa 
tion  of  such  of  the  Southern  and  free  States  as  may  be  willing  to  accede  to  the 
proposed  conditions."  On  a  subsequent  page  he  says,  the  italics  being  his  own : 
"  But  let  the  free  States  everywhere,  and  the  sober,  reflective,  and  honest  men  in 
them,  understand,  that  the  old  Union  is  an  impossibility  unless  the  agitation  of 
slavery  is  brought  to  an  end."  These  extracts  are  suggestive  :  (1.)  Mr.  Kennedy, 
like  some  other  men  in  the  Border  slave  States,  takes  the  position  that  slavery  was 
not  the  cause  of  the  rebellion,  and  yet  all  his  proposals  for  "  reconciliation"  are 
made  with  reference  to  slavery  in  some  of  its  bearings;  giving  thus,  unwittingly, 
the  proof  that  slavery  was  in  reality  the  cause.  (2.)  The  real  difficulty  was  not  that 
the  subject  was  discussed  "in  a  tone  offensive,"1'  but  that  it  was  discussed  at  all. 
Discussion  in  any  form  or  spirit  was  "  offensive,"  unless  it  was  in  favor  of  the  sys- 
totn.  (3.)  But  the  most  remarkable  thing  here  is,  that  so  distinguished  a  gentleman, 
once  a  cabinet  minister,  should  at  any  time  have  seriously  proposed  (and  he  is  by 
no  means  the  only  statesman  in  this  category)  any  State  action,  in  a  popular  govern 
ment,  "  to  discourage  discussion"  on  any  subject;  and  especially  with  the  alterna 
tive  of  dissolving  the  Union,  unless  his  proposed  concessions,  demanded  by  the  sub 
ject  upon  which  discussion  was  to  be  precluded,  were  granted.  But  the  country 
can  well  afford,  at  this  later  day,  to  pass  over  some  things  of  this  kind  which  then 
took  strong  hold  of  many  minds;  and  of  Mr.  Kennedy  this  can  be  said  on  two 
grounds.  He,  like  a  large  portion  of  his  countrymen,  has  obtained  some  new  ideas 
since  then  ;  and  during  the  present  year  he  has  given  his  powers,  with  other  leading 
men  of  Maryland,  to  the  work  of  entirely  removing  slavery  from  that  State.  Some 
Border  State  men  make  no  advance  on  the  subject— unless  it  be  backward. 


RESPONSIBILITY    OF    POLITICIANS.  87 

WHAT   CLASS    OF   NORTHERN   MEN   RESPONSIBLE. 

Here  is  where  the  case  pinches,  and  yet  the  solution  of 
the  question  is  most  easy.  We  freely  concede  that  a  cer 
tain  part  of  the  people  of  the  North  have  a  portion  of  this 
responsibility  to  bear,  but  it  is  not  that  small  and  un- 
intluential  class  whom  Judge  Robertson,  and  other  writers 
who  agree  with  him,  would  hold  up  to  the  public  gaze ; 
nor  yet  that  larger  number  who  manifested  their  dissent 
by  discussion.  It  is  rather  that  class  of  men  in  Church 
and  State, — politicians,  editors,  divines,  and  others,  who 
are  always  influential  in  forming,  controlling,  or  echoing 
public  opinion, — who  have. ever  been  crying  out  about  art 
infringement  of  Southern  rights,  making  apologies  for  the 
South,  courting  the  smiles  of  the  Southern  people,  and 
yielding,  step  by  step,  to  their  extreme  demands.  So  far 
as  provocative  action  may  be  charged  with  responsibility, 
in  yielding  to  the  clamors  of  Southern  passion,  and  ex 
citing  Southern  men  to  demand  more  and  more  in  conces 
sion  to  slavery,  this  class  may  be  justly  held  to  a  large 
measure  of  it, 

RESPONSIBILITY   AMONG   POLITICIANS   NORTH. 

The  "  claims  of  the  South"  were  always  in  the  market. 
They  were  put  up  to  the  highest  bidder  in  the  political 
contests  of  the  country.  They  formed  the  central  plank 
in  political  platforms.  We  state  nothing  more  than  is 
known  and  read  of  all  men,  when  we  say  that  that  party 
which  for  many  years  before  the  rebellion  began  had  com 
monly  the  control  of  the  General  Government,  was  always 
the  successful  competitor ;  and  having  once  and  long  ago 
established  with  the  South  its  subserviency  and  fidelity, 
it  held  its  position  undisputed.  No  slave  was  ever  more 
obedient  to  his  master.  This  was  seen  in  its  conventions, 


88  RESPONSIBILITY    FOll   THE    REBELLION. 

in  its  platforms,  in  its  primary  meetings,  upon  the  stump, 
at  elections,  in  Congress,  in  the  Supreme  Court.  Certain 
concessions  emboldened  Southern  politicians  to  demand 
what  had  never  been  dreamed  of  by  the  founders  of  the 
Government ;  but  the  demand  was  no  sooner  made  than 
it  was  granted,  and  generally,  in  latter  days,  in  the  name 
of  the  supreme  organic  law ;  so  that,  at  length,  the  doc 
trine  of  Southern  Statesmen,  and  of  nearly  the  whole 
South  era  people,  was  precisely  that  stated  by  Dr.  Thorn- 
well,  in  his  elaborate  vindication  of  the  secession  of  South 
Carolina :  "  The  Constitution  covers  the  whole  territory 
of  the  Union,  and  throughout  that  territory  has  taken 
slavery  under  the  protection  of  law ;"  a  doctrine,  as  un 
derstood  at  the  South,  which  would  have  startled  the 
framers  of  the  Constitution,  and  which  is  nevertheless  but 
the  echo  of  the  celebrated  declaration  of  President  Bu 
chanan  about  Kansas  while  it  was  yet  a  Territory,  that 
slavery  existed  there  in  fact  and  by  the  Constitution  of 
the  United  States,  as  truly  as  it  existed  in  Georgia  and 
South  Carolina. 

RESPONSIBILITY    AMONG    CHURCHMEN    NORTH. 

The  subserviency  of  Northern  politicians  had  its  coun 
terpart  within  the  Northern  Churches,  and  in  those  eccle 
siastical  bodies  which  extended  into  all  parts  of  the  Union. 
We  do  not  mean  that  corruption,  bargaining,  and  sale,  for 
place  and  profit,  occurred  in  like  manner ;  but  the  dispo 
sition  to  apologize,  extenuate,  stifle  discussion,  and  yield 
to  Southern  wishes,  lest  slavery  should  receive  some  dam 
age,  or  somebody  or  something  connected  with  it,  some 
where  or  somehow,  should  be  in  some  manner  or  in  some 
degree  hurt,  in  purse,  feeling,  or  character ;  all  this  has 
been  too  frequently  illustrated  in  the  higher  courts  of  the 
Church,  and  defended  by  religious  journals,  and  makes  too 


SOUTHSIDE    VIEW    OF    NO11THEKN    CLERGYMEN.  89 

prominent  and  frequent  a  figure  in  our  recent  religious 
history,  scarcely  to  need  in  these  pages  any  recurrence  to 
the  iacts  except  in  a  general  statement.  And  yet  it  may 
be  well  to  confirm  this  view  by  a  bare  reference  to  the 
influence  this  course  had  upon  the  South,  as  seen  in 
Southern  testimony. 

SOUTIISIDE    VIEW    OF    NORTHERN    CLERGYMEN. 

A  man's  standing  and  influence  are  generally  pretty 
well  determined  by  the  estimation  in  which  he  is  held  by 
his  judicious  friends.  Taking  this  as  a  fair  criterion  of 
judgment,  we  have  only  to  turn  the  eye  South  to  perceive 
how  certain  Northern  men  in  the  Church  were  regarded 
upon  those  questions  which  politically  and  religiously 
divided  the  country,  and  at  length  terminated  in  rebellion 
and  war,  and  thus  to  see  on  which  side  their  influence  for 
many  years,  when  these  difficulties  were  culminating,  was 
thrown. 

If  in  taking  this  Southern  observation  we  are  led  to 
give  names,  it  is  because  we  find  them  presented  in  the 
South,  and  because  they  are  prominent  persons  and  repre 
sentative  men  of  a  large  class  at  the  North.  If  special 
distinct" on  i-  given  to  individuals,  it  only  shows  how 
highly  their  services  were  valued;  and  if  they  are  now 
found  at  last  upon  the  side  of  the  country  and  its  real 
interests,  it  only  serves  to  make  the  lamentation  at  the 
loss  of  their  services  the  more  bitter,  and  to  give  the  sar 
casm  in  which  it  is  expressed  a  keener  point. 

The  Southern  Presbyterian,  a  religious  weekly  published 
at  Columbia,  South  Carolina,  is  a  good  authority  upon  the 
point  in  hand.  In  its  issue  of  February  23,  1861,  it  refers, 
as  "  a  sign  of  the  times,"  to  a  discussion  then  going  on 
between  Rev.  William  Matthews,  of  Georgia,  and  Rev. 
Dr.  N.  L.  Rice,  then  editor  of  the  Presbyterian  Expositor, 


90  KESPONSIBILITY    FOR    THE    EEBELLION. 

at  Chicago.      The  Southern  editor,  Rev.   A.  A.  Porter, 
says  : 

"We  do  not  intend  to  report  the  particulars  of  this  correspondence, 
which  would  be  profitless.  We  allude  to  it  for  a  different  purpose. 
We  have  called  it  a  sign  of  the  times  1  We  regard  it  as  such  for 
several  reasons :  Because  Dr.  Hice,  who  has  heretofore  been  DIS 
TINGUISHED  as  a  defender  of  slavery  and  tJie  South,  and  as  an  antagonist  of 
the  antislavery  party,  now  has  wheeled  about  with  Dr.  Hodge,  and, 
like  him,  appears  on  the  other  side,  against  the  South  and  Slavery. 
We  have  heard  much  of  late  about  a  reaction  in  the  North  in  favor  of 
the  South,  and  have  been  assured  that  our  cause  was  gaining  ground 
there.  Does  this  look  like  it  ? 

To  appreciate  fully  the  point  here  made,  it  is  only  ne 
cessary  to  bear  in  mind  that  this  comes  from  one  who 
well  knows  the  course  of  opinion  and  discussion  in  the 
Church  and  the  country,  and  that  it  comes  from  the  capi 
tal  of  South  Carolina.  If  the  course  of  Dr.  Rice  for 
twenty  years  past  has  such  an  estimation  in  such  a  quar 
ter, — where,  to  be  "  a  defender  of  slavery  and  the  South," 
and  to  be  "  distinguished"  as  such,  has  a  meaning  whose 
significance  cannot  be  mistaken, — it  is  better  testimony 
than  any  we  could  give  to  show  how  great  has  been  his 
influence,  and  on  which  side  it  has  been  exerted,  during 
the  gestation  period  of  that  gigantic  iniquity  which  at 
length  gathered  sufficient  strength  from  such  nutriment 
to  come  forth  armed  and  equipped  to  make  war  upon 
good  government  and  popular  liberty.  This  same  article 
pronounces  Dr.  Rice  "  probably  the  adroitest  debater  now 
living," — another  indication  of  the  high  esteem  in  which 
his  defences  of  "  Slavery  and  the  South"  were  held, — and 
thousands  at  the  North  well  know,  that  had  not  the  class 
of  which  he  is  so  prominent  a  representative  taken  the 
course  they  did,  there  would  have  been  formed  such  a 
public  sentiment  in  the  Church  at  least  as  would  have 


SOUTHSIDE    VIEW    OF    NORTHERN    CLERGYMEN.  91 

checked  the  growing  proslaveryism  and  spirit  of  domina 
tion  in  the  South,  and  which  would  have  gone  far  towards 
preventing  secession,  treason,  rebellion,  and  war. 

The  name  of  Dr.  Hodge  occurs  in  the  foregoing  para 
graph,  associated  with  that  of  Dr.  Rice.  It  appears,  how 
ever,  and  we  should  injustice  state,  that  he  is  not  claimed 
as  having  given  his  influence  to  the  South  in  the  same 
manner.  Southern  men  differ  upon  the  point,  it  is  true. 
Dr.  Armstrong,  in  his  "  Christian  Doctrine  of  Slavery," 
frequently  quotes  Dr.  Hodge  as  sustaining  his  own  views ; 
and  Dr.  Armstrong,  it  is  well  known,  as  seen  in  that  book 
and  in  his  discussions  with  Dr.  Van  Rensselaer,  though 
mild  in  his  terms  and  eminently  Christian  in  his  spirit, 
maintained  and  vindicated  the  extreme  view,  substantially, 
of  the  system  taken  at  the  South.  It  is  well  known,  too, 
that  Dr.  Hodge's  writings  on  slavery  have  been  extensively 
circulated  and  approved  at  the  South,  and  have  undoubt 
edly  exerted  a  large  influence  to  make  the  Southern  people 
quite  contented  with  the  status  of  the  institution,  and  quite 
willing  it  should  be  perpetuated.  It  is  possible,  also,  that 
in  the  above  paragraph  the  editor  designs  to  put  Drs.  Rice 
and  Hodge  in  the  same  category,  and  yet  it  is  not  proba 
ble  ;  for  in  a  subsequent  paper  he  speaks  very  differently 
of  the  latter. 

In  reply  to  a  correspondent,  who  refers  to  "  the  course  of 
Dr.  Hodge,  Dr.  Rice,  Dr.  Lord,  Dr.  Breckinridge,  and  Dr. 
Engles,"  in  regard  to  the  state  of  the  country,  as  "  unex 
pected,"  and  who,  notwithstanding  that  "  course,"  says  of 
them,  "  They  are  every  one  with  us,  and  against  aboli 
tionists,  on  the  slavery  question," — deeming  the  fact  so 
important  as  to  array  the  sentence  in  italics, — the  editor, 
the  Rev.  A.  A.  Porter,  in  The  Southern  Presbyterian  of 
March  30,  1861,  thus  excepts  by  name  two  of  the  persons 
concerned : 

5* 


92  RESPONSIBILITY    FOR   THE    REBELLION. 

"We  cannot  agree  with  our  correspondent  that  the  views  of  the  eminent 
men  whom  he  names,  on  the  slavery  question,  are  acceptable  to  South 
ern  Presbyterians.  Our  readers,  who  noticed  the  communication  of 
"  Georgia,"  in  our  last  number,  must  be  convinced  that  there  is  a  wide 
and  radical  difference  between  us  and  Dr.  Hodge  on  that  subject.  Dr. 
Breckinridge,  it  is  well  known,  is,  and  always  has  been,  an  emancipa 
tionist — that  is,  in  favor  of  the  gradual  abolition  of  slavery.  So  is  Dr. 
Hodge.  So,  we  doubt  not,  are  almost  the  entire  body  of  Northern 
Presbyterians. 

It  thus  appears,  that  while  Dr.  Hodge  is  quoted  favor 
ably  by  Dr.  Armstrong  at  Norfolk,  Virginia,  he  is  not 
deemed  sound  in  South  Carolina  and  Georgia.  Latitude 
sometimes  affects  men's  views  of  moral  questions.  He  is 
by  no  means  put  in  the  category  with  Dr.  Rice,  at  the 
South ;  for,  although  Dr.  Rice  has  said  some  hard  things 
of  slavery,  and  has  been  regarded  as  an  "  emancipationist" 
also,  at  least  at  the  North,  he  has,  nevertheless,  always 
taken  such  a  course,  and  illustrated  so  highly  the  peculiar 
skill  of  "  the  adroitest  debater  now  living,"  that  the  South, 
— even  "  the  extremists"  among  them,  as  we  see, — claimed 
him  as  THEIR  MAN  par  excellence,  to  do  their  work  at  the 
North,  and  thus  give  them  substantial  "  aid  and  comfort." 
Hence  they  have  always  spoken  of  him  kindly,  and  valued 
his  services  at  a  very  high  figure.  This  is  shown  as  truly 
in  their  incidental  references  as  it  would  be  in  a  more 
elaborate  commendation,  and  at  the  same  time  the  thing  is 
done  with  a  better  grace.  Here  is  another  specimen,  in 
17ie  Southern  Presbyterian  of  April  27,  1861,  where  the 
South  Carolina  editor  again  laments  that  he  can  count  no 
longer  on  the  services  of  his  quondam  friend  : 

No  less  authority  than  Dr.  N.  L.  Rice,  who  has  been  regarded  in  iJtf, 
South  as  OUR  BEST  FRIEND  at  the  North,  and  who,  if  we  mistake  not, 
drew  up  the  act  of  1845,  which  was  supposed  by  the  South  to  be  a 
decision  in  our  favor,  tells  us  that  we  must  not  interpret  that  as  revers 
ing  former  acts. 


RESPONSIBILITY    OF    NORTHERN    MEN.  93 

Et  TU,  Brute !  The  "  decision"  here  referred  to,  is 
that  made  by  the  General  Assembly  of  the  Presbyterian 
Church  upon  slavery,  and  this  is  one  of  the  incidental 
evidences  to  show  how  that  famous  paper,  of  which  Dr. 
Rice  is  the  author,  was  regarded  by  tho  South  Carolina 
type  of  proslaveryism. 

RESPONSIBILITY    OF    NORTHERN    MEN   THUS    DETERMINED. 

We  need  not  go  further  in  our  citations.  The  fact  is 
undeniable,  that  a  large  and  influential  class  among  cler 
gymen  and  editors  in  the  Church  of  all  branches  at  the 
North,  exerted  such  an  influence  for  a  long  course  of 
years,  whether  so  intended  or  not,  as  to  foster  that 
spirit,  and  countenance  those  claims  put  forth  by  the 
South,  which  led  Southern  demagogues  to  believe  that 
they  could  rule  the  country  according  to  their  own  pecu 
liar  notions,  and  could  count  upon  their  Northern  friends 
to  sustain  them;  or,  failing  to  rule  it,  could  divide  the 
country,  and  still  look  with  confidence  to  their  support. 
Hence  their  pitiful  cries  when,  in  the  hour  of  need,  they 
found  they  were  forsaken. 

In  regard  to  certain  religious  men  at  the  North, — and 
perhaps  the  same  rnny  be  said  of  politicians,  who,  Mr. 
Jefferson  said,  were  "  allies"  of  the  South, — we  accord  to 
them  a  sincere,  though,  we  think,  a  mistaken  course  of 
speech  and  action.  Some  of  them  have  since  frankly 
acknowledged  that  their  course  was  wrong.  It  tended  to 
deceive  the  Southern  Church.  Since  the  rebellion  began, 
Southern  divines  have  denounced  this  class  of  men  most 
unsparingly,  and  so  have  Southern  journals,  both  of  the 
weekly  and  periodical  press.  They  have  even  pronounced 
them  hypocrites.  All  this  is  very  natural,  even  though 
we  admit  it  to  be  unjust.  But  of  those  who  have  always 
opposed  their  extravagant  claims,  they  have  spoken  with 


94  RESPONSIBILITY   FOR   THE    REBELLION. 

more  respect,  though,  for  them,  they  have  manifested  no 
warmer  love. 

It  is  likewise  well  known,  that  those  Northern  poli 
ticians  who  were  Southern  "  allies,"  have  been  treated  in 
no  mild  manner  at  the  South,  while  the  Republican 
party,  and  even  the  Abolitionists,  have  been  spoken  of 
with  that  higher  consideration,  comparatively  regarded, 
which  one  esteemed  an  open  foe  always  inspires.  It 
is,  for  example,  quite  probable,  that  the  reason  why 
they  so  bitterly  denounce  General  Butler,  is  as  much 
owing  to  the  fact  that  he  was  always  so  prominent  and 
able  in  their  political  councils,  and  instead  of  taking  a 
stand  with  them  when  the  breach  occurred,  as  they  had 
hoped  he  would,  was  found  in  command  of  a  Union  army, 
as  it  was  owing  to  the  stringent  rule  he  exercised  in  New 
Orleans.  We  do  not  hold  this  class  of  public  men  entirely 
responsible  for  the  rebellion,  though  it  is  unquestionable, 
from  the  speeches  of  some  of  them,  during  the  winter  and 
spring  of  1860-61,  before  the  attack  upon  Fort  Sumter, 
made  in  Congress  and  out  of  it,  that  the  Southern  leaders 
still  counted  upon  them  as  "  allies,"  believed  they  would 
stand  by  them  in  an  open  clash  of  arms,  that  the  North 
would  thus  be  divided,  and  that  the  rebellion  would  have 
an  easy  triumph.  The  fact  cannot  be  denied,  that  there 
was  good  reason  for  believing  that  this  reliance  had  a  bet 
ter  foundation  than  many  things  that  are  taken  for  granted. 
It  is  undoubtedly  true  that  the  Southern  leaders  were  so 
far  forth  deceived,  and  were  thus  emboldened  to  do  what 
otherwise  they  might  have  been  restrained  from  doing, 
and  to  this  extent  these  Northern  politicians  were  responsi 
ble  ;  while,  on  the  other  hand,  some  of  these  "  allies" 
were  themselves  deceived,  believing  that  Southern  men 
would  not  dare  to  strike  the  blow.* 

*  We  do  not  put  General  Butler  in  this  category.     He  did  not,  at  thu  period,  take 


RESPONSIBILITY    OF    NORTHERN    MEN.  95 

We  have  good  reason  to  believe,  also,  that  the  leaders 
of  the  Southern  Church,  as  we  have  already  intimated, 
were  stimulated  to  become  active  promoters  of  the  rebel 
lion,  by  virtue  of  the  hold  which  they  believed  they  still 
had  upon  their  special  friends  at  the  North  ;  supposing,  at 
first,  that  their  secession  might  be  effected  peaceably,  or, 
if  it  came  at  last  to  an  open  clash  of  arms,  that  their  faith 
ful  "  allies  "  would  still  stand  by  them. 

The  responsibility  for  the  rebellion,  so  far  as  the  North  is 
concerned,  is  thus  not  difficult  of  adjustment.  It  rests  not 
upon  the  abolitionists;  the  South  themselves  repudiate 
this  idea.  It  rests  rather  upon  those,  in  Church  and  State, 
who  have  countenanced  Southern  extremists,  and  who 
were  claimed  by  them  as  favoring  their  views ;  the  "  adroit- 
est  debaters"  in  Congressional  halls  and  Church  courts,  and 
who  upon  the  stump  and  through  the  press  were  "  distin 
guished  as  defenders  of  slavery  and  the  South ;"  in  this 
manner  nourishing  and  sustaining  Southern  men  up  to  such 

any  course  to  deceive  the  rebels,  nor  was  he  himself  deceived  as  to  their  designs. 
On  the  contrary,  in  December,  1860,  soon  after  the  secession  of  South  Carolina, 
"General  Butler  went  to  Senator  Wilson  of  Massachusetts,  an  old  acquaintance, 
though  long  a  political  opponent,  and  told  him  that  the  Southein  leaders  meant 
war,  and  urged  him  to  join  in  advising  the  Governor  of  their  State  to  prepare  the 
militia  of  Massachusetts  for  taking  the  field.'1  "  One  thing  he  considered  absolutely 
certain :  there  was  going  to  be  a  war  between  Loyalty  and  Treason ;  between  the 
Slave  Power  and  the  Power  which  had  so  long  protected  and  fostered  it.  He  found 
the  North  anxious,  but  still  incredulous.  He  went  to  Governor  Andrew,  and  gave 
him  a  full  relation  of  what  he  had  seen  and  heard  at  Washington,  and  advised  him 
to  get  the  militia  of  the  State  in  readiness  to  move  at  a  day's  notice.  He  suggested 
that  all  the  men  should  be  quietly  withdrawn  from  the  militia  force  who  were 
either  unable  or  unwilling  to  leave  the  State  for  the  defence  of  the  Capital,  and 
their  places  supplied  with  men  who  could  and  would.  The  Governor,  though  he 
could  scarcely  yet  believe  that  war  was  impending,  adopted  the  suggestion.  About 
one-half  the  men  resigned  their  places  in  the  militia;  the  vacancies  were  quickly 
filled;  and  many  of  the  companies,  during  the  winter  months,  drilled  every 
evening  in  the  week,  except  Sundays." — Par-ton's  Sutler  in  New  Orleans,  ch.  ii. 
It  was  unquestionably  owing  to  General  Butler's  suggestions,  as  above  related, 
that  so  large  a  number  of  Massachusetts  troops  were  able  to  obey  the  call  of 
the  President  so  promptly,  in  April,  1861,  occasioned  by  the  attack  upon  Fort 
Sumter. 


96  RESPONSIBILITY    FOR   THE    REBELLION. 

a  point  of  preposterous  demand  for  their  claims,  that  at 
length  the  masses  of  the  people  rose  in  their  sovereign 
majesty  to  throw  off  the  incubus,  and  restore  the  Govern 
ment  to  its  true  and  original  status. 

NORTHERN   RESPONSIBILITY   IN    ANOTHER   LIGHT. 

It  has  often  been  said  that  the  people  of  the  North  had 
no  business  to  trouble  themselves  about  the  question  of 
slavery  in  any  aspect  of  the  case,  as  the  South  were  alone 
responsible  for  the  institution.  This  has  been  the  short 
argument,  many  a  time,  employed  against  Northern  men : 
"  It  is  none  of  your  business  ;  if  it  is  a  sin,  the  Southern 
people  only  are  guilty  of  it ;  if  it  is  a  social  evil,  or  a  polit 
ical  matter,  it  is  wholly  their  concern;  therefore,  let  it 
alone." 

These  are  radical  errors ;  and  yet,  so  shrewd  a  man  as 
Dr.  Thornwell  sustains  them.  He  says  : 

The  responsibility  of  slavery  is  not  upon  the  non-slaveholding  States.  It 
is  not  created  by  their  laws,  but  by  the  laws  of  the  slaveholding  States ; 
and  all  they  do  in  the  case  of  the  fugitive  from  his  master,  is  to  remand 
him  to  the  jurisdiction  of  the  laws  from  which  he  has  escaped.  They 
have  nothing  to  do  with  the  justice  or  injustice  of  the  laws  themselves. 
— Fast-Day  Sermon,  Nov.  21,  1860. 

"We  have  no  complaint  to  make  of  the  opinions  of  the  North  consid 
ered  simply  as  their  opinions.  They  have  a  right,  so  far  as  human 
authority  is  concerned,  to  think  as  they  please.  The  South  has  never 
asked  them  to  approve  of  slavery,  or  to  change  their  own  institutions 
and  to  introduce  it  among  themselves.  The  South  has  been  willing  to 
accord  to  them  the  most  perfect  and  unrestricted  right  of  private  judg 
ment.  But  what  we  do  complain  of,  and  what  we  have  a  right  to  com 
plain  of,  is,  tJiat  thty  sJiould  not  be  content  with  thinking  their  own  thoughts 
themselves,  but  should  undertake  to  make  the  Government  think  them 
likewise. — So.  Pres.  Rev.,  Jan.,  18G1. 

These  arc  erroneous  opinions,  in  any  true  consideration 
of  the  case  •  and  most  flagrantly  so  in  view  of  the  changes 


SLAVERY    MAY    BE    EXAMINED    AT   THE    NORTH.  97 

which  have  occurred,  within  a  recent  period  in  our  history, 
in  Southern  sentiment,  upon  the  social,  moral,  and  politi 
cal  status  of  slavery. 

SLAVERY  MAY  BE  EXAMINED  AT  THE  NORTH. 

These  are  errors,  politically  considered.      Dr.  Thorn- 
well's  argument,  in  both  the  articles  above  quoted,  is  to 
show  that  slavery  is  national.     He  says,  as  before  given : 
"  The  Constitution  covers  the  whole  territory  of  the  Union, 
and  throughout  that  territory  has  taken  slavery  under  the 
protection  of  law."     Admitting  for  the  sake  of  the  argu 
ment  that  this  is  so,  it  follows  that  slavery  is  a  matter  for 
the  consideration  of  the  whole  people,  and  their  responsi 
bility  is  involved  in  every  national  aspect  of  the  institu 
tion ;  to  see  that  its  relations  to  the  Constitution  are  un 
derstood  aright  and  are  properly  maintained.     His  prem 
ises   being   admitted,  the  conclusion  is   inevitable.      But 
without   admitting   the   extreme   views   which   Southern 
politicians  have  often    advanced   in   more   recent   times, 
which  are  not  sustained  by  the  founders  of  the  Govern 
ment,  and  which  we  presume  Dr.  Thorn  well  intends  to 
cover  by  the  sentence  just  quoted,  all  statesmen  agree  that 
in  any  true  relation  of  the  Constitution  to  slavery,  the  insti 
tution,  in  some  of  its  most  important  bearings,  is  one  of 
national  concern  and  national  responsibility.     More  espe 
cially  is  this  true  in  the  light  of  Southern  claims  which  are 
believed  to  be  totally  at  variance  with  the  Constitution. 
It  was  incumbent  on  every  Northern  statesman,  and  upon 
every  Northern  citizen,  to  note  whither  such  sentiments 
were  tending,   and  to    act  accordingly.      It  is  perfectly 
immaterial,  however,  to  the  present  point,  which  construc 
tion  of  the  Constitution  is  right,  the  Northern  or  the  South 
ern.     In  either  case,  slavery  is  a  matter  for  national  con 
sideration.      In   a   purely  political   light,   therefore,   Dr. 


98  RESPONSIBILITY    FOB   THE   REBELLION. 

Thornwell  makes  a  most  ill-founded  complaint  of  the  peo 
ple  of  the  non-slaveholding  States,  in  "  that  they  should 
not  be  content  with  thinking  their  own  thoughts  them 
selves." 

His  position  is  equally  false  in  morals.     The  relation 
which  the  people  of  the  North  sustain  to  slavery  political 
ly,  makes  its  moral  status  of  necessity  one  of  just  concern 
to  them.     If  it  is  an  evil  in  any  sense,  if  a  sin  in  itself,  or 
if  all  its  evils  are  merely  incidental  to  the  relation,  still  the 
inevitable  connection  of  the  whole  people  with  it,  through 
the  structure  of  the  common  Government,  fixes  upon  them 
the  responsibility  in  no  small  degree  of  its  moral  status  and 
relations,  whatever  they  may  be.     It  is  utterly  erroneous 
to  say  that  the  people  of  the  non-slaveholding  States  "have 
nothing  to  do  with  the  justice  or  injustice"  of  the  institu 
tion,  or  even  "  of  the  laws  themselves"  by  which  it  is  reg 
ulated.     If  they  are  concerned  with  it  at  all,  if  they  are 
obliged  to  return  fugitives  that  escape  from  slavery  to  the 
jurisdiction  of  the  laws  from  which  they  have  fled,  or  if 
they  have  any  other  duty  to  discharge  under  that  instru 
ment  which  gives  the  institution  any  national  status  what 
ever,  then  they  have  a  right  to  inquire  into  any  thing  and 
every  thing  which  gives  it  character ;  and  especially  into 
its  moral  status,  for  they  and  the  slaves  themselves  are 
moral  beings.     The  whole  people  of  the  non-slaveholding 
States  may  consider  every  moral  element  and  bearing  of 
the  institution,  and  may  approve  or  condemn,  in  whole  or 
in  part,  according  to  their  best  judgment,  and  act  as  right 
eousness  demands.     Nor  can  any  past  settlement  of  prin 
ciples  concerning  it,  or  any  opinion  entertained  of  it,  by 
the  fathers,  or  by  anybody  else,  preclude  their  right  thus  to 
do ;  for  they  must  act  on  their  own  responsibility  before 
God. 

But  most  especially, — if,  indeed,  there  can  be  any  differ- 


A    SUBJECT    FOR    ALL    MANKIND.  99 

ence, — is  it  their  privilege  not  only,  but  their  right  and 
solemn  duty,  to  compass,  the  whole  subject,  when  the 
South,  well  nigh  or  quite  universally,  abandoning  the  opin 
ions  concerning  it  held  substantially  by  the  whole  country 
in  the  early  days  of  the  Republic, — by  statesmen  and  di 
vines, — have  latterly  taught  that  slavery  is  right  and  a 
"blessing,"  is  an  "Ordinance  of  God"  and  a  "school  of 
virtue,"*  and  is  vindicated  throughout  the  whole  Scrip 
tures.  What  the  people  of  the  North  have  claimed,  is,  to 
examine  these  pretensions,  to  see  whether  the  Fathers  both 
of  the  Church  and  of  the  State  in  this  country  were  right 
or  wrong,  and  having  formed  a  judgment  to  act  accord 
ingly  ;  and  this  is  the  whole  they  have  claimed. 

A    SUBJECT    FOE    ATT.    MANKIND. 

Nor  is  this  all.  The  moment  the  claim  is  made  that 
Southern  slavery  is  sanctioned  and  sanctified  by  the  Word 
of  God,  and  is  on  a  par  with  the  conjugal  and  parental 
relations,  the  whole  subject  is  thrown  open  to  the  discus 
sion  of  all  people  in  this  country  not  only,  but  to  the  entire 
Christian  world  to  whom  the  Scriptures  are  given.  Under 
the  modern  claims  for  Southern  negro  slavery,  it  is  the 
idlest  of  all  possible  objections  to  say  of  Christians  of  even 
any  foreign  nation,  that  "they  have  nothing  to  do  with 
the  justice  or  injustice"  of  the  institution.  If  it  is  a  per 
fectly  Scriptural  system,  as  is  claimed,  they  may  inquire 
into  it,  as  they  may  into  any  social  system  claiming  such  a 
sanction;  as  into  polygamy  in  Utah,  or  into  any  of  the 

*  "  Strange  as  it  may  sound  to  those  who  are  not  familiar  with  the  system,  Slare- 
ry  is  a  school  of  virtue,  and  no  class  of  men  have  furnished  sublimer  instances  of 
heroic  devotion  than  slaves  in  their  loyalty  and  love  to  their  masters.  We  have 
seen  them  rejoice  at  the  cradle  of  the  infant,  and  weep  at  the  bier  of  the  dead  ;  and 
there  are  few  amongst  us,  perhaps,  who  have  not  drawn  their  nourishment  from 
their  generous  breasts."— (Fast-Day  Sermon.')  Some  naturalists  tell  us  that  there 
are  certain  "  irrational  animals"1  who  give  the  same  illustrations  of  "  virtue." 


100  RESPONSIBILITY    FOR    THE    REBELLION. 

systems  of  heathenism;  and  the  same  if  it  is  not  sustained 
by  Scripture ;  and  to  determine  whether  it  is  or  not  thus 
sanctioned,  they  must  examine  it,  for  there  is  no  other  way 
of  arriving  at  the  truth. 

And  beyond  this,  we  may  say  that  the  principle  of  self- 
defence  and  self-preservation, — "  the  first  law  of  life," — 
impels  to  this  course.  We  have  seen  that  it  was  a  part  of 
the  scheme  of  the  rebel  leaders  to  make  the  whole  North 
slaveholding,  and  to  people  its  lands  with  slaves  fresh  from 
Africa.  The  same  men  think  that  Europe  would  be  better 
off  with  slavery.  If,  then,  such  a  change  has  taken  place 
in  this  country  as  to  lead  men  to  applaud  it  where  it  was 
once  only  tolerated,  and  to  declare  it  in  every  sense  a 
"blessing,"  where  once  it  was  pronounced  a  "curse"  to 
all  concerned,  who  can  tell  but  like  transformations  may 
occur  elsewhere,  and  among  other  nations  ? 

FREE    SOCIETY    PITIED    AND    LAMENTED. 

Is  it  not  well  known  that  eminent  Southern  writers,  not 
content  to  enjoy  the  blessings  of  slavery  alone,  have  ex 
pressed  their  pity  for  the  social  condition  of  the  North ; 
have  lamented  "  the  failure  of  free  society ;"  have  become 
eloquent  upon  "  the  organization  of  labor;"  have  predicted 
that  the  North  would  be  obliged  to  resort  to  their  system 
to  prevent  anarchy  and  ruin ;  and  upon  these  convictions 
have  recommended  themselves  to  imitation  by  all  the 
nations  of  the  earth  ?  Dr.  Thornwell  says  : 

We  confidently  anticipate  the  time  when  the  nations  that  now  revile 
us  would  gladly  change  places  with  us.  In  its  last  analysis,  slavery  is 
nothing  but  an  organization  of  labor.  *  *  *  Society  is  divided  be 
tween  princes  and  beggars.  If  labor  is  left  free,  how  is  this  condition  of 
things  to  be  obviated?  The  Government  must  either  make  provision 
to  support  people  in  idleness,  or  it  must  arrest  the  law  of  population  and 
keep  them  from  being  born,  or  it  must  organize  labor.  *  *  *  On 
what  principle  shall  labor  be  organized  so  as  to  make  it  certain  that  the 


SLAVERY    THE    CONDITION    FOR    ALL    LABORERS.        101 

laborer  shall  never  be  without  employment,  and  employment  adequate 
for  his  support  ?  The  only  way  in  which  it  can  be  done,  as  a  permanent 
arrangement,  is  by  converting  the  laborer  into  capital;  that  is,  by  giving 
the  employer  a  right  of  property  in  the  labor  employed  ;  in  other  words, 
BY  SLAVERY.  *  *  *  That  non-slaveholding  Slates  will  eventually  have 
to  organize  labor,  and  to  introduce  something  so  like  slavery  that  it  will 
be  impossible  to  discriminate  between  them,  or  to  suffer  from  the  most  i 
violent  and  disastrous  insurrections  against  the  system  which  creates 
and  perpetuates  their  misery,  seems  to  be  as  certain  as  the  tendencies 
in  the  laws  of  capital  and  population  to  produce  the  extremes  of  poverty 
and  wealth.  We  do  not  envy  them  their  social  condition.  *  *  *  We 
desire  to  see  no  such  state  of  things  among  ourselves,  and  we  accept  as 
a  good  and  merciful  constitution  the  organization  of  labor  which  Provi 
dence  has  given  us  in  slavery. — Fast-Day  Sermon. 

SLAVERY    THE    PROPER    CONDITION    FOR    ALL    LABORERS. 

The  plain  English  of  the  foregoing  is,  that  Dr.  Thorn- 
well  would  have  all  the,  laborers  in  every  nation  reduced  to 
slavery.  He  would  not  merely  go  to  Africa  for  laborers, 
but  would  reduce  every  white  man  who  is  compelled  to 
labor,  from  freedom  to  slavery.  Dr.  Palmer  joins  his 
lamentation  over  freedom  to  the  laborer,  and  over  the 
perils  of  free  society,  as  follows: 

The  so-called  Free  States  are  working  out  the  social  problem  under 
conditions  peculiar  to  themselves.  These  conditions  are  sufficiently  hard, 
and  their  success  is  too  uncertain  to  excite  in  us  the  least  jealousy  of 
their  lot.  With  a  teeming  population,  which  the  soil  cannot  support — 
with  their  wealth  depending  upon  arts,  created  by  artificial  wants — with 
an  eternal  friction  between  the  grades  of  their  society — with  their  labor 
and  their  capital  grinding  each  other  like  the  upper  and  nether  millstones 
— with  labor  cheapened  and  displaced  by  new  mechanical  inventions, 
bursting  more  asunder  the  bonds  of  brotherhood;  amid  these  intricate 
perils  we  have  ever  given  them  our  sympathy  and  our  prayers,  and  have 
never  sought  to  weaken  the  foundations  of  their  social  order.  God 
grant  them  complete  success  in  the  solution  of  all  their  perplexities  I — 
Thanksgiving  Discourse. 

We  sincerely  thank  the  kind  man  for  his  "  sympathy  and 


102  RESPONSIBILITY    FOE    THE    REBELLION. 

prayers"  concerning  a  state  of  things  of  which  he  knows 
so  little;  but  we  do  not  think  the  greatest  sufferers  in 
"  the  so-called  Free  States'!  are  quite  willing  to  say  they 
are  ready  to  be  reduced  to  that  "system  of  organized 
labor"  which  is  here  marked  out  for  them. 

The  mild  and  amiable  Dr.  Armstrong,  of  Norfolk,  Vir 
ginia,  does  not  leave  it  to  inevitable  inference,  but  states 
it  in  terms,  that  the  white  laborers  of  Europe  are  the  pro 
per  subjects  of  whom  to  make  slaves.  This  is  his  view  of 
the  matter : 

It  may  be  that  such  a  slavery,  regelating  the  relations  of  capital  and 
labor,  though  implying  some  deprivation  of  personal  liberty,  will  prove 
a  better  defence  of  the  poor  against  the  oppression  of  the  rich,  than 
the  too  great  freedom  in  which  capital  is  placed  in  many  of  the  Free 
States  of  Europe  at  the  present  day.  Something  of  this  kind  is  what  the 
masses  of  free  laborers  in  France  are  clamoring  for  under  the  name  of 
the  "  right  to  labor."  *  *  *  It  may  be  that  Christian  slavery  [the 
author's  italics]  is  God's  solution  of  the  problem  about  which  the 
wisest  statesmen  of  Europe  confess  themselves  "at  fault." — Christian 
Doctrine  of  Slav  try. 

These  Christian  Doctors  of  Divinity,  so  eloquent  and 
earnest  upon  "  Christian  Slavery ;"  so  tearful  and  prayerful 
over  the  condition  of  society  at  the  North;  so  anxious  to 
have  all  laborers,  white  and  black,  blonde  and  brunette,  in 
America  and  Europe,  reduced  to  slavery,  the  only  distinc 
tion  being  that  the  "  rich"  shall  be  the  masters  and  the 
"poor"  their  slaves, — and  who  would,  upon  this  principle 
alone,  illustrate  "  the  organization  of  labor"  in  every  nation 
upon  earth,  allowing  masters  only  to  carry  a  pocket  dic 
tionary  from  a  Southern  press  (if  the  South  ever  printed 
one)  to  define  "poor"  and  "rich," — are  of  course  sup 
ported  in  all  this  by  the  politicians  and  economists  of  the 
South.  In  De  Jlow's  Review  for  November,  1857,  one  of 
them  discourseth  as  follows,  on  "  Southern  Thought :" 


SLAVERY    THE    CONDITION    FOR    ALL    LABORERS.        103 

We  must  teach  that  slavery  is  necessary  in  all  societies,  as  well  to  pro 
tect,  as  to  govern  the  weak,  poor,  and  ignorant.  This  is  the  opposite 
doctrine  to  that  of  the  political  economists.  We  should  show  that  slave 
society,  which  is  a  series  of  subordinations,  is  consistent  with  Christian 
morality — for  fathers,  masters,  husbands,  wives,  children,  and  slaves, 
not  being  equals,  rivals,  competitors,  and  antagonists,  best  promote  each 
other's  selfish  interests  when  they  do  most  for  those  above  or  beneath 
thorn.  Within  the  precincts  of  the  family,  including  slaves,  the  golden 
rule  is  a  practical  and  wise  guide  of  conduct.  But  in  free  society,  where 
selfishness,  rivalry,  and  competition,  are  necessary  to  success,  and 
almost  to  existence,  this  rule  cannot  be  adopted  in  practice.  It  would 
reverse  the  whole  action  of  such  society,  and  make  men  martyrs  to  their 
virtues.  *  *  *  We,  of  the  South,  can  build  up  an  ethical  code 
founded  on  the  morality  of  the  Bible,  because  human  interests  with  us 
do  not  generally  clash,  but  coincide.  Without  the  family  circle,  it  is 
true,  competition  and  clashing  interests  exist,  but  slavery  leaves  few 
without  the  family,  and  the  little  competition  that  is  left  is  among  the 
i-ich  and  skilful,  and  serves  to  keep  society  progressive.  It  is  enough 
that  slavery  will  relieve  common  laborers  of  the  evils  of  competition, 
and  the  exactions  of  skill  and  capital.  *  *  *  Southern  thought  will 
teach  that  protection  and  slavery  must  go  hand  in  hand,  for  we  cannot 
efficiently  protect  those  whose  conduct  we  cannot  control.  *  *  * 
It  is  the  duty  of  society  to  protect  all  its  members,  and  it  can  only  do  so 
by  subjecting  each  to  that  degree  of  government  constraint,  or  slavery, 
which  will  best  advance  the  good  of  each  and  of  the  whjle.  Thus 
ambition,  or  the  love  of  power,  properly  directed,  becomes  the  noblest 
of  virtues,  because  power  alone  can  enable  us  to  be  safely  benevolent  to 
the  weak,  poor,  or  criminal.  To  protect  the  weak,  WE  MUST  FIRST  ENSLAVE 
THEM,  and  this  slavery  must  be  either  political  and  legal,  or  social. 
*  *  *  Slavery  is  necessary  as  an  educational  institution,  and  is  ivorth 
ten  times  all  the  common  schools  of  the  North.  Such  common  schools 
teach  only  uncommonly  bad  morals,  and  prepare  their  inmates  to  gradu- 
te  in  the  penitentiary,  as  the  statistics  of  crime  at  the  North  abundantly 
prove.  *  *  *  We,  of  the  South,  assume  that  man  has  all  along  in 
stinctively  understood  and  practised  that  social  and  political  government 
best  suited  to  his  nature,  and  that  domestic  slavery  is,  in  the  general,  a 
natural  and  necessary  part  of  that  government,  and  that  its  absence  is  owing 
to  a  decaying  diseased  state  of  society,  or  to  something  exceptional  in 
local  circumstances,  as  in  desert,  or  mountainous,  or  new  countries, 
where  competition  is  no  evil,  because  capital  has  no  mastery  over  labor. 


104  RESPONSIBILITY    FOR   THE    REBELLION. 

WHO,  NOW,  IS    RESPONSIBLE  ? 

The  reader  is  no  doubt  willing  to  rest  here  ;  these  les 
sons  in  political  economy  are  sufficient  for  his  present 
reflection.  The  divines  and  the  economists  whose  views 
are  now  given,  are  among  the  foremost  leaders  of  the 
rebellion ;  were  those  who,  at  the  earliest  moment,  urged 
it  on,  and  those  whose  teachings  for  twenty  years  past 
had  helped  to  prepare  the  Southern  people  for  the  work 
in  which  they  are  to-day  engaged,  on  a  hundred  fields  of 
carnage  and  blood,  where  lie  the  bleaching  bones  of  the 
flower  of  a  generation  of  young  men  ;  and  they  are  those 
who  have,  during  every  step  in  the  progress  of  the  war,  by 
prayers  and  counsels,  and  active  aid  in  the  armies  of  trea 
son,  given  all  their  might  to  bring  forth  these  legitimate 
fruits  of  the  seed  they  have  sown.  This  is  their  work ;  for 
it  they  are  responsible. 

The  laborers  and  mechanics  of  the  North, — all  the 
"poor,"  indeed,  of  every  class, — may  see  the  feast  which 
was  elaborately  prepared  for  them,  and  the  destiny  which 
inevitably  awaited  them,  could  the  South  have  had  their 
way  in  the  unlimited  and  unchecked  control  of  the  Gov 
ernment  ;  and  they  may  learn,  in  this,  the  real  character  of 
that  rebellion,  to  put  down  which  the  Government  has 
called  the  people  to  arms. 

All  may  see,  in  the  light  of  these  sentiments,  the  real 
nature  of  that  system,  and  the  real  character  of  its  suppor 
ters,  that  have  found  apologists  and  extenuators  in  the  North 
for  these  many  years  past,  in  the  "  adroitest  debaters"  and 
most  "  distinguished  defenders  of  slavery  and  the  South," 
in  Church  arid  State.  While  these  men  were  sowing 
broadcast  these  seeds  through  every  means  in  their  power, 
it  was  deemed  a  labor  of  love  to  prepare  for  them  the  soil. 
While  they  could  teach  their  doctrines  at  will,  and  pity 


WHO,    NOW,    IS   RESPONSIBLE?  105 

that  condition  of  "free  society,"  and  mourn  over  that  hard 
ness  of  heart  which  would  -not  receive  them,  it  was  deemed 
"  agitation,"  "  agitation,"  "  agitation,"  nothing  but  wicked 
interference  with  matters  which  concerned  them  not,  for 
pulpit,  or  press,  or  Church  court,  to  raise  even  a  gentle 
note  of  remonstrance.  While  some  who  had  the  sagacity 
to  see  what  was  inevitably  coming  upon  the  Church  and 
upon  the  country  from  such  teachings,  and  who  had  the 
boldness  and  the  faithfulness  to  God's  truth  to  declare  it, 
— and  whose  far-sightedness  the  result  has  remarkably 
verified, — -have  been,  for  that  very  faithfulness,  exiled  by 
the  Church  from  posts  of  usefulness  to  which  their  qualifi 
cations  and  labors  eminently  entitled  them,  others,  chiefly 
instrumental  in  this  ostracism,  have  been  honored  by  South 
ern  votes  with  high  stations,  and  have  illustrated  their 
faithfulness  by  eminent  subserviency  to  those  who  so  long 
controlled  them.  But  for  all  deeds  there  is  a  day  of  reck 
oning  ;  and  we  are  quite  sure  the  Church  itself  is  begin 
ning  to  understand  those  who  have  been  true  to  her  inter 
ests  and  those  who  have  dishonored  and  betrayed  her. 

When  the  day  shall  eventually  come  to  write  the  history 
of  this  rebellion,  it  will  not  be  difficult,  so  far  as  men  of 
the  North  are  concerned,  to  determine  the  true  measure 
of  their  responsibility.  And  when  the  full  character  and 
aims  of  the  rebel  leaders  shall  be  understood,  it  will  be  the 
judgment  of  the  historian,  as  it  is  now  the  conviction  of 
the  loyal  masses  of  the  people,  that  such  a  disease  as  had 
thus  fastened  itself  upon  the  body  politic,  could  not  be 
purged  from  it  except  through  the  agency  of  gunpowder 
— the  means  which  the  rebels  themselves  invoked. 


106  RESPONSIBILITY   FOR   THE   WAB. 


CHAPTER  IV. 

RESPONSIBILITY  FOR    BEGINNING  AND    CONTINUING  THE 

WAR. 

THE  South  admit  that  they  took  the  initiative  for  seces 
sion,  but  charge  the  North  with  having  begun  the  war. 
This  charge  has  been  made  from  the  beginning,  and  is 
deemed  so  clear  that  it  admits  of  no  dispute.  It  is  found 
in  their  public  journals,  secular  and  religious,  in  the  speeches 
of  their  public  men,  and  is  formally  set  forth  and  reiterated 
in  the  State  papers  of  the  rebel  President  and  the  members 
of  his  Cabinet,  and  by  the  rebel  Congress.*  From  the 
moment  of  the  actual  outbreak  of  hostilities  to  the  present 

*  "  A  sense  of  oppression  and  wrong,  on  the  part  of  the  North,  in  instituting  and 
sustaining  this  war  upon  the  South,  is  deep  seated  and  abiding  in  their  minds,  and 
they  will  shrink  from  no  sacrifices  and  turn  away  from  no  dangers  in  resisting  it" 
— Presbytery  of  Western  District,  Tennexxee,  July,  1861.  Rev.  Dr.  Thomas  Smyth, 
of  Charleston,  S.  (1,  when  speaking  of  "the  defensive  character  of  the  war  of  the 
South,"  says:  "That  war,  as  we  have  already  proved,  was  provoked,  threatened,  per 
fidiously  commenced,  and  openly  proclaimed  by  the  North.1' — Southern  Presbyterian 
Reviero,  April,  1S63.  In  an  "  Address  of  (the  Rebel)  Congress  to  the  People  of  the 
Confederate  States."  issued  in  February,  1864,  it  is  said:  'That  a  people,  professing 
to  be  animated  by  Christian  sentiment,  and  who  had  regarded  our  peculiar  institution 
as  a  blot  and  blur  upon  the  fair  escutcheon  of  their  common  Christianity,  should 
make  war  upon  the  South  for  doing  what  they  had  a  perfect  right  to  do,  *  *  * 
was  deemed  almost  beyond  belief  by  many  of  our  wisest  ininds.  *  *  *  These 
reasonable  anticipations  were  doomed  to  disappointment.  The  red  glare  of  battle 
kindled  at  Sumter,  dissipated  all  hopes  of  peace,  and  the  two  Governments  were  ar 
rayed  in  hostility  against  each  other.  We  charge  the,  responsibility  of  this  war 
upon  the  United  State*.  They  are  accountable  for  the  blood  and  havoc  and  ruin  it 
has  caused.  *  *  *  The  war  in  which  we  are  engaged  was  wickedly,  and  against 
all  our  protests  and  most  earnest  efforts  to  the  contrary,  forced  upon  UH."  The  rebel 
President,  Jefferson  Davis,  in  one  of  his  messages  to  Congress,  referred  to  in  the 
above-mentioned  Address,  says :  "  Our  efforts  to  avoid  the  war,  forced  on.  us  as  it 
was  by  the  lust  of  conquest  and  the  insane  passions  of  our  foes,  are  known  to  man 
kind." 


JOHN   M.    BOTTS    ON   SECESSION.  107 

hour,  they  have  persistently  declared  that  the  General 
Government,  sustained  by  the  body  of  the  Northern  peo 
ple,  are  alone  responsible  for  having  begun,  and  for  having 
continued,  the  war. 

They  insist  that  secession  was  a  peaceful  remedy  for 
their  wrongs,  against  which  war  could  not  justly  be  made ; 
and  they  declare,  that,  ever  since  war  began,  they  have 
been  ready  to  make  peace,  but  that  the  General  Govern 
ment  would  not  have  peace. 

These  are  grave  issues,  lying  at  the  root  of  the  contro 
versy  in  which  the  two  sections  of  the  country  are  involved. 
We  cannot  here  canvass  the  alleged  right  of  secession, 
which  is  claimed  to  be  a  Constitutional  remedy  for  the 
grievances  complained  of.  Our  object,  at  present,  is  dif 
ferent.  Whether  secession,  under  the  Constitution,  be  a 
justifiable  remedy  for  any  invasion  of  right  or  not,  it  is 
only  necessary,  in  reference  to  the  immediate  object  now 
in  hand,  to  show,  that  the  kind  of  secession  which  the 
South  undertook,  was  early  begun,  and  was  vigorously 
prosecuted,  by  acts  which  can  have  no  other  terms  of  de 
scription  than  those  which  belong  to  the  vocabulary  of  war. 
To  assume  that  such  acts  are  authorized  under  the  Con 
stitution,  that  they  are  what  it  contemplated  as  proper  to 
be  done  in  carrying  out  secession,  that  these  are  acts  of 
peace,  and  that  therefore  secession  is  a  peaceful  remedy 
for  supposed  wrongs,  are  propositions  so  monstrous,  that 
no  one  can  be  deceived  by  them  the  moment  the  acts  in 
question  come  to  be  examined  in  their  nature  and  the  time 
of  their  occurrence. 

JOHN    M.    BOTTS    ON    SECESSION. 

As  introductory  to  a  brief  narration  of  early  events,  well 
remembered  by  the  whole  world,  we  refer  to  a  letter  of 
the  Hon.  John  Minor  Botts,  of  Virginia,  dated  Richmond, 
6 


108  RESPONSIBILITY   FOR   THE   WAR. 

January  24,  1861,  written  in  answer  to  a  request  made  to 
him  to  become  a  candidate  for  the  Convention,  which 
passed  the  Ordinance  of  Secession  for  Virginia.  It  is  well 
known,  that  so  eager  were  the  Southern  rebels  for  a  dis 
ruption  of  the  Union,  that  they  rejoiced  over  the  election 
of  Mr.  Lincoln  to  the  Presidency,  with  exceeding  great 
joy,  as  furnishing  the  justifiable  ground  for  the  step.  Re 
ferring  to  this,  Mr.  Botts  says : 

I  ain  not  willing  to  sacrifice  the  best  interests  of  my  State  and  my 
country,  and  the  hopes  of  oppressed  mankind  throughout  the  world,  in 
upholding  South  Carolina  in  a  bad  cause ;  in  a  wholly  unjustifiable  and 
petulant  whim,  which  she  avows  she  has  indulged  for  thirty  years.  I 
am  not  willing  to  rush  upon  destruction,  for  a  misplaced  sympathy  for  a 
State  that  exulted  over  the  election  of  a  Republican  President,  burned 
their  tar  barrels  and  illuminated  their  cities,  because  it  afforded  them 
the  pretext  for  rebellion,  and  that  has  violently  seized  upon  the  forts, 
arsenals,  arms,  and  ammunition,  and  money  of  the  United  States,  and 
has  fired  upon,  and  driven  from  her  waters,  an  unarmed  vessel  bearing 
that  flag  of  the  Union  which  has  borne  us  triumphantly  through  every 
war  and  every  trouble. 

NARRATIVE    OF   EVENTS. 

These  words  of  Mr.  Botts,  suggest  the  events  of  the  fall 
and  winter  of  1860-61,  which  fix  indelibly  upon  the  South 
the  responsibility  of  having  begun  the  war,  in  repeated  and 
long  continued  acts  of  war.  The  work  of  revolt  began 
immediately  after  the  election,  and  in  the  midst  of  the 
rejoicing  at  the  result  of  it.  State  after  State,  by  formal 
acts,  openly  repudiated  the  authority  of  the  United  States, 
and  "  seceded."  The  people  of  these  States,  in  various 
localities,  sustained  by  the  public  authorities,  forcibly  seized, 
as  Mr.  Botts  declares,  the  public  property  of  the  nation. 
The  forts,  ships,  mints,  custom-houses,  public  money,  arms, 
arsenals,  ammunition,  and  other  public  property,  were 
taken.  All  these,  confessedly,  belonged,  not  to  the  re- 


NARRATIVE    OF    EVENTS.  109 

spective  States,  but  to  the  United  States.  They  were 
built,  manufactured,  or  purchased,  as  the  property  and  by 
the  money  and  authority  of  the  United  States.  The  title 
was  not  questioned  by  any  one.  Many  of  these  things 
were  taken  by  force.  The  guards  of  mints  and  custom 
houses  were  eluded  or  overborne ;  and  the  forts  and  ships, 
in  some  of  the  former  of  which  were  garrisons,  and  in  the 
latter  armed  officers,  were  seized  by  bodies  of  armed  men 
in  superior  numbers,  and  the  United  States  forces  were 
compelled  to  surrender.  These  were  not  the  acts  of  mere 
mob  violence.  They  will  take  in  history,  as  they  have  in 
the  eye  of  public  law,  a  different  character.  These  were 
ACTS  OF  WAR  ;  the  early  measures  of  an  open  evolution. 
They  were  directly  authorized  by  organized  States,  which 
claimed  to  have  thrown  off  the  national  authority.  They 
were  taken  that  they  might  resist  by  force  any  attempt  on 
the  part  of  the  United  States  to  repossess  them,  and  to 
re-establish  the  authority  which  had  been  subverted.  These 
acts  were,  therefore,  severally,  acts  of  ivar,  so  far  as  such 
acts  can  be,  before  war  has  been  formally  declared  by  com 
petent  authority,  or  in  a  revolution  before  there  has  been 
any  forcible  step  taken  to  resist  it.  It  is  possible,  that 
technically  these  acts  may  not  be  acts  of  war,  for  there 
was,  as  yet,  no  legal  power  to  declare  it ;  but  practically 
such  was,  to  all  intents  and  purposes,  their  character.* 

*  Soon  after  the  secession  of  South  Carolina  and  the  seizure  of  the  Forts  in  the 
harbor  of  Charleston,  and  the  like  seizure  of  the  Forts  within  the  limits  of  Georgia 
and  Alabama  by  those  States,  the  sluggishness  of  Florida  was  thus  chided  by  the 
Charleston  Mercury:  "To  our  friends  in  Florida  we  would  respectfully  pass  a 
word.  There  are  two  powerful  strongholds  and  most  important  points  of  military 
offence  and  defence  in  Florida — Pensacola  and  Key  West  The  States  both  of 
Georgia  and  Alabama  have  wisely  taken  time  by  the  forelock,  and  put  themselves 
in  possession  of  such  fortresses  as  lie  within  their  borders."  "  In  this  view,  it  is  im 
portant  for  the  people  of  Florida  to  reflect  that  there  are  perhaps  no  fortresses  along 
our  whole  Southern  coast  more  important  than  those  of  Florida.  These  Forts  can 
command  the  Whole  Gulf  trade.  And  should  Mr.  Buchanan  carry  out  what  appears 
to  be  his  present  plan,  he  certainly  must  desire  to  hold  possession  of  these  Forts." 


110  RESPONSIBILITY   FOB   THE    WAR. 


REKEL    GOVERNMENT    FORMED THE    SOUTH    ARMING. 

In  the  mean  time,  and  before  all  these  acts  had  been  con 
summated,  the  several  States  which  had  "  seceded,"  formed 
what  they  termed  a  Provisional  Government,  called  the 
"Confederate  States  of  America,"  in  opposition  to  the 
Government  of  the  United  States,  and  soon  afterwards 
adopted  a  Constitution,  elected  officers,  and  invested  this 
Government  with  a  permanent  character  and  authority. 
This  Government  called  out,  as  some  of  the  seceded  States 
had  previously  done,  thousands  of  troops,  armed  and 
equipped  them  with  the  munitions  taken  from  the  United 
States  arsenals,  placing  some  of  them  in  the  forts  and  ships 
they  had  seized,  the  garrisons  and  crews  of  the  national 
Government  having  already  surrendered  to  them. 

OUR    GOVERNMENT   INACTIVE. 

During  this  time,  and  while  all  these  things  were  pub 
licly  occurring,  and  the  public  journals  of  the  country 
were  publishing  the  details,  the  General  Government  took 

"But  let  Florida  hold  these  Forts,  and  the  entire  aspect  of  affairs  is  changed.11  "  The 
commerce  of  the  North  in  the  G-ulf  will  fall  an  easy  prey  to  our  bold  privateers  ; 
and  California  gold  will  pay  all  such  little  expense*  on  our  part.'1''  In  enumer 
ating  these  and  other  seizures,  in  a  Report  made  to  the  House  of  Representatives 
soon  after,  the  Hon.  John  A.  Dix,  Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  says:  "  Third. — The 
seizure  by  Louisiana  of  all  United  States  moneys,  as  well  as  those  of  private  deposi 
tors  in  the  mint  and  sub-treasury  at  New  Orleans  and  other  places.  Fourth. — 
The  seizure  of  revenue  cutters,  by  arrangement  between  their  commanders  and  the 
collectors  of  Mobile,  New  Orleans,  and  Charleston.  Fifth. — The  expulsion  of  the 
sick  and  invalid  patients,  at  the  United  States  hospital  at  New  Orleans,  in  order  to 
provide  accommodation  for  Louisiana  troops."  On  the  general  subject,  in  this  same 
Report,  Mr.  Dix  says  :  "  Throughout  the  whole  course  of  encroachment  and  aggres 
sion,  the  Federal  Government  has  borne  itself  with  a  spirit  of  paternal  forbearance, 
of  which  there  is  no  example  in  the  history  of  public  society;  waiting  in  patient 
hope  that  the  empire  of  reason  would  resume  its  sway  over  those  whom  the  excite 
ment  of  passion  has  thus  far  blinded,  and  trusting  that  the  friends  of  good  order, 
wearied  with  submission  to  proceedings  which  they  disapproved,  would,  at  no  dis 
tant  day,  rally  under  the  banner  of  the  Union,  and  exert  themselves  with  vigor  and 
success  against  the  prevailing  recklessness  and  violence." 


SIEGE    OF   FORT   STJMTER.  Ill 

no  measures  to  prevent  them.  If  names  are  things,  and  if 
things  have  names  descriptive  of  their  character,  these 
acts  of  aggression  were  acts  of  war  ;  and  to  whatever  we 
may  now  attribute  the  non-interference  by  the  General 
Government,  under  the  administration  of  President  Bu 
chanan, — whether  to  fear,  timidity,  imbecility,  hope  of 
restoring  authority  and  preserving  peace  by  doing  noth 
ing  ;  or,  to  direct  complicity  with  treason, — still,  the  facts 
will  go  down  to  history,  that  while  the  rebels  were  spend 
ing  months  in  these  acts  of  war,  and  in  open  preparation 
for  war,  the  Government  against  which  they  had  rebelled 
did  nothing  of  a  warlike  character  to  oppose  them. 

SIEGE    OF   FORT   SUMTEK. 

During  the  progress  of  these  events,  the  rebels,  not 
being  able  easily  to  seize  some  of  the  forts  of  the  United 
States, — as  Forts  Pickens,  Sumter,  Moultrie,  and  others, — - 
commenced  against  them  a  regular  siege.  Fort  Sumter,  in 
the  harbor  of  Charleston,  had  a  garrison  of  some  seventy 
men,  under  the  heroic  Major  Robert  Anderson.  Being 
instructed  by  the  Government  not  to  surrender  the  fort, 
and  also  instructed  not  to  fire  upon  the  besiegers  unless 
fired  upon  by  ihemf  they  were  quietly  permitted  to  en- 

*  President  Buchanan,  in  his  Annual  Message  to  Congress,  December  3d,  1860, 
speaking  of  the  "  property  of  the  United  States  in  South  Carolina,"  says :  "  It  is  not 
believed  that  any  attempt  will  be  made  to  expel  the  United  States  from  this  prop 
erty  by  force  ;  but  if  in  this  I  should  prove  to  be  mistaken,  the  officer  in  command 
of  the  forts  has  receive-d  orders  to  act  strictly  on  the  defensive.  In  such  a  contin 
gency,  the  responsibility  for  consequences  would  rightfully  rest  upon  the  heads  of 
the  assailants."  An  order  given  to  Major  Anderson  from  the  War  Department, 
delivered  at  Fort  Moultrie,  December  11,  I860,  says :  "  You  are  carefully  to  avoid 
every  act  which  would  needlessly  tend  to  provoke  aggresfsioji,  and  for  that  reason 
you  are  not,  without  necessity,  to  take  up  any  position  which  could  be  construed 
into  the  assumption  of  a  hostile  attitude ;  but  you  are  to  hold  possession  of  the 
Forts  in  the  harbor,  and  if  attacked,  you  are  to  defend  yourself  to  the  last  extrem 
ity.  The  smallness  of  your  force  will  not  permit  you,  perhaps,  to  occupy  more  than 
one  of  the  three  Forts,  but  an  attack  on  or  an  attempt  to  take  possession  of  either 
of  them,  will  be  regarded  as  an  act  of  hostility,  and  you  may  then  put  your  com- 


112  RESPONSIBILITY    FOR   THE    WAR. 

circle  the  fort  with  powerful  siege-works,  mounted  by  the 
heaviest  guns  belonging  to  the  United  States,  until  the 
reduction  of  the  fort  was  made  morally  certain,  whenever 
the  rebels  should  choose  to  open  fire.  The  force  which 
was  under  arms  to  man  and  support  the  batteries  erected 
around  Fort  Sumter,  numbered,  according  to  their  own 
estimates,  from  seven  to  ten  thousand  men.  They  were 
armed  mostly  from  the  Government  arsenals.  Major  Ander 
son  could  at  any  time  have  demolished  the  works  in  course 
of  construction  around  him,  or  prevented  their  construc 
tion  at  all ;  but  he  was  ordered  by  the  Government  to 
stand  strictly  on  the  defensive.  Whether  anybody  had 
"  blundered,"  most  surely  "  all  the  world  wondered." 
However  humiliating  to  its  loyal  citizens  such  a  course  was, 
and  reproachful  to  the  national  honor  and  power  in  the 
eyes  of  other  nations,  it  is  yet  true  that  the  Government 
made  not  one  solitary  effort  of  a  warlike  nature  to  recover 
its  property  or  reassert  its  jurisdiction.  Not  a  soldier  was 
called  out  by  the  Government,  while  the  rebels  wer-e  mus 
tering  and  drilling  their  forces. 

COXGRESS    NOT   AGGRESSIVE. STAR    OF   THE   WEST. 

Congress  was  in  session  during  four  months  after  these 
measures  of  revolt  were  initiated,  and  for  several  weeks 
after  the  warlike  deeds  referred  to  had  well  nigh  reached 
their  climax.  Yet,  Congress  passed  no  act  and  took  no 
step  of  a  warlike  character  to  meet  these  aggressions,  but 
was,  at  this  very  time,  maturing  measures  for  peacefully 
settling,  if  possible,  the  difficulties  of  the  country.  In  one 
instance,  while  Congress  was  in  session,  the  Administra 
tion  then  in  power  (Mr.  Buchanan's),  as  was  clearly  its 

mand  into  either  of  them  which  you  may  deem  most  proper  to  increase  its  power 
of  resistance.  You  are  also  authorized  to  take  similar  steps  whenever  you  have 
tangible  evidence  of  a  design  to  proceed  to  a  hostile  act." 


CONGRESS   NOT   AGGRESSIVE. — STAK    OP   THE    WEST.    113 

right  and  duty,  sent  the  Star  of  the  West,  an  unarmed 
vessel,  with  provisions  for  the  garrison  in  Fort  Suinter. 
The  men  were  nearly  in  a  starving  condition,  cut  off  from 
their  usual  supplies  from  the  Charleston  markets.  The 
Star  of  the  West  was  fired  upon,  and  compelled  to  aban 
don  the  enterprise.  This  was  another  open  act  of  war, 
committed  by  the  assumed  authority  of  the  rebel  Govern 
ment.  Yet,  the  Government  of  the  United  States  did  not 
retaliate.  Not  a  single,  shot  was  fired  in  return.  The 
brave  garrison  looked  on  in  silence ;  no  provisions  were 
landed  ;  their  stores  were  nearly  exhausted  ;  they  saw  the 
flag  of  their  country  dishonored  and  fired  upon  by  traitors  ; 
but  all  was  borne,  as  the  Government  had  so  ordered.* 
Nor  did  Congress  take  any  action,  such  was  the  disposi 
tion  towards  conciliation.  It  was  during  this  very  period 
that  the  several  successive  measures  looking  to  peace, — by 


*  At  this  time,  Major  Anderson  addressed  a  note  to  the  Governor  of  South  Caro 
lina,  in  which  he  says:  "Two  of  your  batteries  fired  this  morning  upon  an  un 
armed  vessel  bearing  the  flag  of  my  Government."  "  I  cannot  but  think  this  a 
hostile  act,  committed  without  your  sanction  or  authority.  Under  that  hope,  I 
refrain  from  opening  a  fire  on  your  batteries."  "  I  respectfully  ask  whether  the 
above-mentioned  act  was  committed  in  obedience  to  your  instructions,  and  notify 
you,  if  it  is  not  disclaimed,  that  I  regard  it  as  an  act  of  war"  This  vessel  was  the 
Star  of  the  West.  The  Governor  replies  to  Major  Anderson:  "Shew-as  fired  into. 
This  act  is  perfectly  justified  by  me."  Governor  Pickens  further  says:  "Your  po 
sition  in  the  harbor  has  been  tolerated  &y  the  authorities  of  the.  State  ;"  and  "  the 
act  of  which  you  complain  is  in  perfect  consistency  with  the  rights  and  duties  of 
the  State."  Major  Anderson  rejoins  :  "I  have  deemed  it  proper  to  refer  the  whole 
matter  to  my  Government."  These  notes  bear  date,  January  9, 1861.  The  CJiarles- 
ton  Courier  of  January  10,  shows  the  amount  of  the  firing  at  the  vessel:  "The 
Star  of  the  West  rounded  the  point,  took  the  ship  channel  inside  the  bar,  and  pro 
ceeded  straight  forward  until  opposite  Morris  Island,  about  three-quarters  of  a  mile 
from  the  battery.  A  ball  was  then  fired  athwart  the  bows  of  the  steamer.  The 
Star  of  the  West  displayed  the  stars  and  stripes.  As  soon  as  the  flag  was  unfurled, 
the  fortification  fired  a  succession  of  shots.  The  vessel  continued  on  her  course 
with  increased  speed ;  but  two  shots  taking  effect  upon  her,  she  concluded  to  retire. 
Fort  Moultrie  fired  a  few  shots  at  her,  but  she  was  out  of  range.  The  damage  done 
to  the  Star  of  the  West  is  trifling,  as  only  two  out  of  seventeen  shots  took  effect 
upon  her.  Fort  Sumter  made  no  demonstration,  except  at  the  port-holes,  whero 
the  guns  were  run  out  bearing  on  Morris  Island." 


114  RESPONSIBILITY   FOR   THE    WAR. 

the  Peace  Convention,  and  the  proposed  Amendments  to 
the  Constitution, — were  under  consideration.  This  forbear 
ance,  in  the  face  of  those  repeated  insults  to  the  national 
authority  and  honor  which  culminated  in  firing  upon  the 
national  flag  without  resentment,  was  mistaken  by  the 
rebels  for  timidity  and  cowardice.  It  only  served  to 
stimulate  their  determination  toward  resistance  to  that 
power  which  they  could  so  easily  defy,  and  whose  measures 
had  only  inspired  their  contempt. 

NEW   ADMINISTRATION. ATTACK    ON   FORT   SUMTER. 

Weeks  passed  on.  The  session  of  Congress  had  expired 
by  its  Constitutional  limitation,  and  the  new  Administra 
tion,  with  Mr.  Lincoln  as  President,  came  into  power  on 
the  4th  of  March,  1861.  On  the  sixth  of  that  month,  only 
two  days  after  Mr.  Lincoln's  inauguration,  the  "  Confede 
rate"  Congress  passed  an  Act  authorizing  a  military  force 
to  be  raised  of  one  hundred  thousand  men. 

At  length  the  works  for  reducing  Fort  Sumter  Avere 
nearly  completed.  At  this  time  the  garrison  had  but  some 
two  or  three  days'  supply  of  provisions.  This  was  well 
known  to  the  rebel  authorities.  The  Government,  as  in 
duty  bound,  determined  on  a  second  attempt  to  send  a 
supply ;  and,  at  the  same  time,  as  a  still  further  evidence 
of  its  forbearance  and  of  its  disposition  to  conciliation  and 
peace,  the  Government  gave  the  voluntary  assurance  to  the 
besiegers  that  no  reinforcement  of  men  or  munitions  would 
be  attempted,  but  that  it  would  only  supply  the  desti 
tute  garrison  with  provisions,  and  that  no  warlike  demon 
stration  would  be  made  unless  this  should  be  interfered 
with.  This  peaceful  determination  of  the  Government 
was  made  the  occasion  of  an  attack  upon  thefort,  even 
before  the  provisioning  vessels  had  arrived.  Here  was 
another,  and  the  climax  in  a  series,  of  open  acts  of  war, 


THE   UNAVOIDABLE   ISSUE.  115 

under  express  orders  from  the  rebel  Government  at  Mont 
gomery  ;  while  the  General  Government,  against  which 
they  were  made,  had  not  called  out  a  soldier,  nor  fired  a 
gun,  nor  done  one  warlike  act  in  opposition  to  them.  As 
an  inevitable  event,  after  a  gallant  resistance  of  an  attack 
of  some  two  days,  by  a  circle  of  batteries  constructed 
without  opposition  and  completely  investing  the  fort,  the 
starved  garrison  of  seventy  men  surrendered  to  the  army 
of  seven  thousand.*  It  was  then,  and  not  till  then,  that 
the  Government  laid  aside  its  forbearance,  that  the  Presi 
dent  MADE  THE  FIRST  CALL  FOR  TROOPS,  to  defend  the 
nation's  honor  and  rights,  to  recover  its  property,  and  to 
restore  its  authority. 

THE    UNAVOIDABLE   ISSUE. 

The  Government  of  the  United  States  thus  forbore  as 
long  as  forbearance  was  possible,  and  perhaps  much  longer 
than  was  wise ;  until,  indeed,  this  inevitable  issue  was 
presented, — that  it  must  succumb,  without  resistance,  to  ail 
open,  well-organized,  armed,  and  bloody  rebellion,  against 
its  authority,  property,  honor,  and  power,  and  become  a 
scoffing  and  a  byword  among  all  the  nations  of  the  earth, 
and  a  prey  to  their  insults  and  rapacity ;  or  that  it  must 
make  at  least  an  attempt  to  recover  and  maintain  its  rights 
by  the  sword,  which  God  had  put  into  the  hand  of  its 
Chief  Magistrate  for  the  punisnment  of  evil-doers  and  for 
the  praise  of  them  that  do  well.  This  simple  alternative 
was  forced  upon  the  Government,  as  the  whole  world 
plainly  saw. 

The  foregoing  facts  are  so  recent  as  to  be  within  the  mem- 

*  The  Charleston  Mercury,  of  May  3, 1861,  gives  the  amount  of  "shot  and  shell 
expended  during  the  bombardment  of  Fort  Sumter,"  from  fourteen  batteries  which 
had  been  specially  erected  for  its  reduction,— not  including  Fort  Moultrie,— as  "two 
thousand  three  hundred  and  sixty-one  shot,  and  nine  hundred  and  eighty  shell." 

6* 


116  RESPONSIBILITY   FOR   THE   WAR. 

ory  of  those  who  have  paid  attention  to  the  current  events 
of  the  early  period  of  the  war.  And  yet,  it  is  with  such  facts 
before  them,  that  the  rebels  and  their  sympathizers  persist 
in  asserting  that  "  the  Government  of  the  United  States 
is  the  aggressor,"  that  "  the  North  began  the  war,"  and 
that  "  the  South  is  fighting  in  self-defence ;"  and  it  is  upon 
the  issue,  thus  falsely  made,  that  much  eloquence  is  ex 
pended  in  the  endeavor  to  get  up  sympathy  for  "  our  op 
pressed  Southern  brethren,"  and  to  cast  odium  upon  the 
National  Government  and  upon  those  who  are  sustaining 
it  in  its  effort  to  regain  rightful  authority  over  the  whole 
domain  of  the  Union. 

The  earliest  possible  date  when  the  United  States  Gov 
ernment  began,  on  its  part,  the  war  which  it  is  now  pro 
secuting  to  resist  secession,  and  put  down  treason  and 
rebellion,  was  April  15,  1861,  when  President  Lincoln,  by 
proclamation,  called  for  seventy-five  thousand  troops.  Up 
to  that  moment,  no  warlike  step  for  these  ends  had  been  taken. 
And  even  then,  by  that  proclamation,  the  rebels  were  allowed 
"  twenty  days  to  disperse  and  retire  peacefully  to  their 
respective  abodes."  Had  they  availed  themselves  of  this, 
no  act  of  war  upon  their  persons  or  property  would  have 
been  committed ;  but  they  laughed  this  to  scorn,  and  went 
on  more  vigorously  in  their  warlike  measures,  which  they 
had  been  steadily  prosecuting  jive  full  months. 

GENERAL   IVl'cLELLAN's    OPINION. 

General  McClellan,  in  his  address  at  the  dedication  of 
the  Battle  Monument  at  West  Point,  on  the  15th  of  June, 
1864,  mentions  the  cause  of  the  war,  the  unjustifiableness 
of  the  rebellion,  and  the  necessity  of  maintaining  our 
nationality,  in  the  following  terms  : 

Stripped  of  all  sophistry  and  side  issues,  the  direct  cause  of  the  war, 
as  it  presented  itself  to  the  honest  and  patriotic  citizens  of  the  North, 


SOUTHERN   ASSUMPTIONS.  117 

v.'ns  simply  this :  Certain  States,  or  rather,  a  portion  of  the  inhabitants 
of  certain  States,  feared,  or  professed  to  fear,  that  injury  would  result  to 
their  rights  and  property  from  the  elevation  of  a  particular  party  to 
power.  Although  the  Constitution  and  the  actual  condition  of  the  Gov 
ernment  provided  them  with  a  peaceable  and  sure  protection  against 
the  apprehended  evil,  they  preferred  to  seek  security  in  the  destruction 
of  the  Government,  which  could  protect  them,  and  in  the  use  of  force 
against  the  national  troops  holding  a  national  fortress.  To  efface  the 
insult  offered  our  flag ;  to  save  ourselves  from  the  fate  of  the  divided 
Republics  of  Italy  and  South  America ;  to  preserve  our  Government 
from  destruction  ;  to  enforce  its  just  power  and  laws ;  to  maintain  our 
very  existence  as  a  nation — these  were  the  causes  that  compelled  us  to 
draw  the  sword.  Rebellion  against  a  Government  like  ours,  which 
contains  the  means  of  self-adjustment,  and  a  pacific  remedy  for  evils, 
should  never  be  confounded  with  a  revolution  against  despotic  power, 
which  refuses  a  redress  of  wrongs.  Such  a  rebellion  cannot  be  justified 
upon  ethical  grounds,  and  the  only  alternative  for  our  choice  is  its  sup 
pression,  or  the  destruction  of  our  nationality.  At  such  a  time  as  this, 
and  in  such  a  struggle,  political  partisanship  should  be  merged  in  a 
true  and  brave  patriotism,  which  thinks  only  of  the  good  of  the  whole 
country. 

SOUTHERN     ASSUMPTIONS    VS.    "  NORTHERN   AGGRESSIONS." 

Taking  the  ground  that  the  North  began  the  war,  the 
leaders  of  the  rebellion  have  aimed  to  stimulate  their  own 
people,  and  to  make  out  a  case  before  the  world,  that  they 
are  fighting  in  self-defence. 

Says  Dr.  Smyth,  in  the  article  before  referred  to,  in  the 
Southern  Presbyterian  Review,  April,  18G3  :  "By  every 
instinct  of  self-preservation  and  defence,  by  the  divinely 
authorized  as  well  as  inherent  natural  right  of  all  her  citi 
zens  in  the  Government  ordained  by  them,  as  '  free,'  and 
'  using  their  liberty'  (1  Pet.  ii.),  the  South  was  imperatively 
required  to  defend  life,  liberty,  and  the  pursuit  of  happi 
ness,  even  unto  blood,  against  the  arrogant  and  rapacious 
usurpation  of  the  North."  Dr.  Smyth  refers  to  "the  con- 
clusiveness  of  the  foots  adduced,  in  proof  of  the  aggres- 


1  1 8  EESPONSIBILITY   FOE   THE    WAK. 

sion  of  the  North  in  originating  this  war"  as  set  forth  in 
an  article  of  this  Review,  in  1861,  on  the  "Battle  of  Fort 
Sumter,"  which  we  have  not  seen.  From  some  incidental 
allusions,  however,  it  is  clear  that  he  relies  for  "proof" 
upon  certain  "  negotiations"  attempted  by  the  Southern 
leaders  with  the  Government,  in  which  they  were  unsuc 
cessful,  and  which  are  known  to  the  country.  He  takes 
the  view  of  Southern  writers  generally. 

The  argument  based  upon  this  feature  of  the  case  they 
push  with  zeal ;  but  their  premises  are  false,  their  reason 
ings  illusive,  and  their  conclusions  natural.  Not  being 
able  to  set  aside  the  warlike  character  of  the  acts  wlrch 
we  have  detailed,  they  set  forth  that  they  were  trying, 
at  the  same  time,  to  negotiate  with  the  Government  a  set 
tlement  between  the  North  and  South,  but  that  the  Gov 
ernment  would  not  come  to  any  terms,  and  thus  forced 
upon  the  South  the  necessity  of  a  war  of  self-defence  in 
behalf  of  secession. 

DIPLOMATISTS   FEOM   SOUTH    CAEOLINA. 

We  need  not  go  into  any  long  statement  of  the  measures 
on  which  the  rebels  rely  to  show  that  they  were  seeking  a 
peaceful  solution  of  their  troubles  by  negotiation,  while,  as 
we  have  seen,  they  were  making  war  in  fact. 

Soon  after  the  secession  of  South  Carolina,  she  sent  three 
Commissioners  to  Washington,  Messrs.  Barnwell,  Adams, 
and  Orr,  to  treat  with  the  General  Government.  They 
address  a  communication  "  To  the  President  of  the  United 
States."  They  exhibit  their  credentials,  and  declare  the 
object  of  their  mission.  They  do  not  come  to  negotiate 
with  the  Executive  about  the  "  secession"  of  their  State. 
fhat  is,  with  them,  a  fact  accomplished.  Deeming  the 
Constitution  but  a  "  compact,"  and  not  establishing  a 
*'  Government"  proper,  but  merely  forming  a  "  league" 


DIPLOMATISTS    FEOM    SOUTH    CAROLINA.  110 

between  several  "  nations,"  any  one  of  them  can  withdraw 
at  pleasure.  The  separation,  or  "  secession,"  is  a  fact  of  the 
past.  One  party  has  dissolved  the  "  compact ;"  and  that 
is  the  end  of  the  matter.  These  diplomatists  have  nothing 
to  say  on  that  subject ;  the  deed  is  done ;  the  case  is 
closed.  They  are  the  accredited  representatives  of  a 
Foreign  Power  ;  they  are  from  the  "  nation"  of  South 
Carolina.  They  state  to  President  Buchanan  : 

We  are  authorized  and  empowered  to  treat  with  tho  Government  of 
the  United  States  for  the  delivery  of  the  forts,  magazines,  light-houses, 
and  other  real  estate,  with  their  appurtenances  in  the  limits  of  South 
Carolina;  and  also  for  an  apportionment  of  the  public  debt,  and  for  a 
division  of  all  other  property  held  by  the  Government  of  the  United 
States,  as  agent  of  the  Confederated  States,  of  which  South  Carolina  was 
recently  a  memlsr,  and  generally  to  negotiate  as  to  all  other  measures 
and  arrangements  proper  to  be  made  and  adopted  in  the  existing  rela 
tions  of-  the  parties,  and  for  the  continuance  of  peace  and  amity  between 
this  Commonwealth  and  the  Government  at  "Washington. 

They  also  furnish  the  President  "  with  an  official  copy 
of  the  Ordinance  of  Secession,"  and  intimate  that  they 
"  were  ready  to  negotiate"  with  him  "  upon  all  such  ques 
tions  as  are  necessarily  raised  by  the  adoption  of  this  ordi 
nance  ;"  and  they  had  hoped  all  things  would  go  on  well. 

But  the  scene  suddenly  changes.  "  The  events  of 
the  last  twenty-four  hours,"  say  they,  "  render  such  an 
assurance  impossible."  What  is  the  matter  ?  Why,  they 
hear  that  Major  Anderson  has  "  changed  his  base,"  and 
"retired"  from  Fort  Moultrie  to  Fort  Sumter.  They 
complain  bitterly ;  tell  the  President :  "  We  came  here  the 
representatives  of  an  authority  which  could,  at  any  time 
within  the  past  sixty  days,  have  taken  possession  of  the 
Forts  in  Charleston  harbor;"  but  the  game  has  flown. 
"  Until  these  circumstances  are  explained,"  they  say  to  the 
President,  "  we  are  forced  to  suspend  all  discussion  as  to 


120  RESPONSIBILITY   FOB   THE   WAK. 

any  arrangement  by  which  our  mutual  interests  may  be 
amicably  adjusted." 

And  then,  "in  conclusion," — for  all  documents  must 
have  an  end, — they  "  urge  upon"  the  President  "  the  im 
mediate  withdrawal  of  the  troops  from  the  harbor  of 
Charleston.  Under  present  circumstances,  they  are  a 
standing  menace  which  renders  negotiation  impossible, 
and,  as  our  recent  experience  shows,  threatens  speedily  to 
bring  to  a  bloody  issue  questions  which  ought  to  be  settled 
with  temperance  and  judgment." 

The  President  makes  a  long  reply ;  the  Commissioners 
of  the  Palmetto  "  nation"  put  in  a  long  rejoinder  ;  and 
upon  the  latter  the  following  indorsement  is  made  :  "  This 
paper,  just  presented  to  the  President,  is  of  such  a  char 
acter  that  he  declines  to  receive  it."  The  inference  is,  that 
the  President  deemed  the  rejoinder  insulting ;  and  thus 
ends  the  first  attempt  at  negotiation,  and  the  last  made  by 
the  South  Carolina  patriots. 

Without  going  into  an  analysis  of  this  correspondence, 
it  is  clear  that  the  turning  point  of  the  case,  and  wfhich 
occasioned  the  breaking  down  of  the  negotiation,  was  the 
change  of  the  garrison  under  Major  Anderson  from  Fort 
Moultrie  to  Fort  Sumter.  What  would  have  happened, 
had  not  that  occurred,  no  one  can  tell ;  but  what  did 
happen  was  occasioned  by  that  movement. 

THEIR    DEMAND    INSOLENT. 

And  now,  what  is  here  plainly  involved  ?  South  Caro 
lina  claims  to  have  "  seceded,"  to  be  "  out  of  the  Union," 
to  be  a  "  sovereign  and  independent  nation,"  self-created, 
"  born  in  a  day  ;"  to  have  sprung  like  Minerva  from  the 
head  of  Jove,  "  armed  in  all  the  panoply  of  wisdom."  For 
the  argument's  sake,  grant  it  all.  By  her  Ministers  Pleni 
potentiary  she  complains  that  the  soldiers  of  another  nation 


THEIR   DEMAND    INSOLENT.  121 

are  removed  from  one  fort  to  another,  both  of  which  are 
confessedly  its  own.  Had  not  the  United  States  Govern 
ment  a  right  to  order  this  change,  without  asking  permis 
sion,  or  giving  a  reason  to  South  Carolina,  or  anybody 
else?  Who  shall  doubt  it?  If  it  had  not,  then  the 
United  States  is  not  itself  an  independent  nation.  If  it 
had,  who  shall  complain,  if  the  Government  choose  to  give 
the  order  ?  Or,  if  Major  Anderson  took  the  initiative,  and 
the  Government  thought  fit  to  sustain  him,  the  authority 
for  the  change  was  the  same.  If  it  be  said  that  the  United 
States  is  not  a  nation,  but  only  an  "  agent  of  the  Confed 
erated  States,"  as  the  Commissioners  phrase  it,  the  case  is 
not  altered  ;  for,  unquestionably,  this  is  one  of  the  very 
functions  with  which  the  "  agent"  is  intrusted.  The  Gov 
ernment  has  supreme  command  of  the  army  and  navy,  of 
the  national  forces  and  fortresses,  of  its  ships  and  munitions 
of  war.  It  cannot  surrender  this  agency  at  the  request  or 
dictation  of  one  of  this  "  congeries  of  nations,"  without 
any  regard  to  the  will  of  the  other  thirty- three. 

But  the  insolence  of  this  newly-born  "  nation"  does  not 
stop  here.  It  demands  "the  immediate  withdrawal  of  the 
troops  from  the  harbor  of  Charleston,"  and  adds  that  "they 
are  a  standing  menace  which  renders  negotiation  impos 
sible."  This  is  diplomacy  on  stilts ;  which,  being  inter 
preted,  is  this :  We  have  come  here  on  our  own  business 
to  talk  with  you;  evacuate  your  fortress,  that  our 
"  nation"  may  take  quiet  possession,  or  we  will  not  open 
our  lips  !  And  this  is  \hefinale  :  Unless  this  is  done,  the 
"  questions"  we  have  come  to  discuss  will  "  speedily"  be 
brought  "  to  a  bloody  issue." 

This  is  Southern  statesmanship.  This  is  South  Carolina 
"  negotiation."  This  is  the  diplomatic  etiquette  of  chivalry. 
This,  we  suppose,  is  in  part,  at  least,  "  the  correspondence 
since  made  public,"  by  which  Dr.  Smyth  would  make  out 


122  RESPONSIBILITY   FOE   THE    WAR. 

the  general  charge  against  the  Government,  that  the  war 
"  was  provoked,  threatened,  perfidiously  commenced,  and 
openly  proclaimed  by  the  North  ;"  and  by  which  he  would 
establish  "  the  defensive  character  of  the  war  of  the  South." 

WHAT  PRESIDENT  BUCHANAN  INTENDED. 

But  before  we  admit  this  aspect  of  the  issue  which  Dr. 
Smyth  presents,  let  us  look  a  little  more  closely  at  this 
diplomacy.  Dates  here  are  important.  The  letter  of  the 
Palmetto  Commissioners  to  President  Buchanan,  bears  date, 
"Washington,  Dec.  29,  I860."  The  President's  reply 
was  written  the  next  day.  He  states  that  on  hearing  that 
Major  Anderson  had  gone  to  Fort  Sumter : 

My  first  promptings  were  to  command  him  to  return  to  his  former 
position;  *  *  *  but  before  any  step  could  possibly  have  been  taken  in 
this  direction,  we  received  information  that  the  "  Palmetto  flag  floated  out 
to  the  breeze  at  Castle  Pinckney,  and  a  large  military  force  went  over  lout 
night  (the  21th)  to  Fort  Moultrie."  Thus  the  authorities  of  South  Caro 
lina,  without  waiting  or  asking  for  any  explanations,  and  doubtless  be 
lieving,  as  you  have  expressed  it,  that  the  officer  had  acted  not  only 
without  but  against  my  orders,  on  the  very  next  day  after  the  night 
when  the  removal  was  made,  seized,  by  a  military  force,  two  of  the  Fed 
eral  Forts  in  the  harbor  of  Charleston,  and  have  covered  them  under  their 
own  flag  instead  of  that  of  the  United  States.  *  *  *  On  the  very 
day,  the  27th  inst.,  that  possession  of  these  two  Forts  was  taken,  the 
Palmetto  flag  was  raised  over  the  Federal  Custom- House  and  Post-  Office 
in  Charleston.  *  *  *  In  the  harbor  of  Charleston  we  now  find 
three  Forts  confronting  each  other,  over  all  of  which  the  Federal  flag 
floated  only  four  days  ago ;  but  now,  over  two  of  them,  this  flag  has 
been  supplanted,  and  the  Palmetto  flag  has  been  substituted  in  its 
stead.  IT  is  UNDER  ALL  THESE  CIRCUMSTANCES  THAT  I  AM  URGED  IMME 
DIATELY  TO  WITHDRAW  THE  TROOPS  FROM  THE  HARBOR  OF  CHARLESTON, 
AND  AM  INFORMED  THAT  WITHOUT  THIS,  NEGOTIATION  IS  IMPOSSIBLE. 
THIS  I  CANNOT  DO — THIS  I  WILL  NOT  DO.  *  *  *  At  this  point  of 

writing,  I  have  received  information  by  telegraph  from  Captain  Ilumph.- 
reys,  in  command  of  the  arsenal  at  Charleston,  that  "  it  has  to-day  (Sunday, 
the  30/7i)  been  taken  by  force  of  arms."  It  is  estimated  that  the  munitions 
of  war  belonging  to  this  arsenal  are  worth  half  a  million  of  dollars. 


HYPOCRISY    OF   THEIR    PEACEFUL   PRETENSIONS.          123 


HYPOCRISY    OF    THEIR    PEACEFUL    PRETENSIONS. 

Now  we  have  the  true  altitude  of  the  diplomatic  seat 
taken  by  the  South  Carolina  envoys.  Writing  to  the 
President  on  the  29th  of  December,  they  of  course  knew, 
as  the  whole  community  did,  by  telegraph,  the  occurrences 
of  the  27th,  at  Charleston  ;  and  by  private  telegrams  to 
themselves,  undoubtedly,  they  knew  a  great  deal  more. 
They  knew  that  Forts  Moultrie  and  Pinckney,  and  the  Cus- 
tom-House  and  Post-Office,  had  all  been  "  seized,"  by  the 
employment  of  a  "  large  military  force"  as  far  as  neces 
sary,  and  that  the  Stars  and  Stripes  had  been  pulled  down 
and  the  Rattlesnake  flag  run  up,  and  the  latter  now  floated 
over  each  of  those  structures  owned  by  the  United  States  ; 
and  they  no  doubt  knew  what  was  to  happen  the  next  day, 
when  the  arsenal  would  be  "  taken  by  force  of  arms,"  and 
the  reptile  banner  cover  that  too. 

Thus  forewarned  and  forearmed,  they  propose  to  "nego 
tiate"  on  behalf  of  the  Palmetto  "  nation"  which  at  home 
has  adopted  these  little  customary  preliminaries  to  peace 
ful  diplomacy,  provided  always  the  President  will  now  on 
his  part  add  to  them  one  little  item  more  which  they  deem 
indispensable ;  that  is,  cause  "  the  immediate  withdrawal 
of  the  troops"  from  the  only  remaining  Fort  in  the  harbor. 
"  Negotiation"  is  absolutely  "  impossible"  without  this  ; 
and,  unless  this  is  done,' — and  here  is  the  grand  and  ami 
cable  outcome, — "  a  bloody  issue"  will  "  speedily"  result ! 

The  ridiculous  figure  cut  by  these  Falstaifian  gentlemen 
and  one  of  the  "  Great  Powers"  which  they  represent,  as 
the  world  beholds  it,  ought  to  be  in  itself  a  sufficient  cas- 
tigation  for  their  insolence  ;  but  when  we  see  the  studied 
and  persistent  attempt  to  substantiate  the  charge,  in  the 
face  of  such  facts,  that  the  Government  sustained  by  the 
North  was  the  aggressor,  arid  the  South  was  acting  purely 


124  RESPONSIBILITY    FOR   THE    WAR. 

on  the    "  defensive,"  the  whining  hypocrisy  of  such  pre 
tensions  deserves  the  scorn  of  all  honest  men. 

IRREFRAGABLE    POSITION    OF   THE    PRESIDENT. 

Passing  by  the  "  ground  and  lofty  tumbling"  of  the 
South  Carolina  envoys  in  the  role  of  diplomats,  the  Presi 
dent  presented  an  argument  in  his  communication  to  them 
which  was  conclusive  of  the  whole  case.  They  had  come 
as  the  representatives  of  a  Foreign  Power,  to  "  negotiate." 
He  told  them  he  had  no  authority  to  meet  them  in  that 
character,  and  he  could  only  treat  them  and  their  mission 
accordingly.  He  refers  them  to  his  Annual  Message  to 
Congress,  presented  a  short  time  before,  at  the  beginning 
of  the  session,  in  which  he  says : 

Apart  from  the  execution  of  the  laws,  so  far  as  this  may  be  practica 
ble,  the  Executive  has  no  authority  to  decide  what  shall  be  the  relations 
between  the  Federal  Government  and  South  Carolina.  He  has  been 
invested  with  no  such  discretion.  He  possesses  no  power  to  change  the 
relations  hitherto  existing  between  them,  much  less  to  acknowledge  the 
independence  of  the  State:  This  would  be  to  invest  a  mere  Executive 
officer  with  the  power  of  recognizing  the  dissolution  of  the  Confederacy 
among  our  thirty-three  sovereign  States. 

The  Southern  leaders,  in  Church  and  State,  rest  the 
strength  of  their  case,  in  attempting  to  show  their  peaceful 
and  the  North's  warlike  disposition,  upon  the  fact  that  the 
Government  would  not  "  negotiate ;"  that  is,  would  not  at 
once  acknowledge  their  "  secession,"  and  recognize  their 
independence  of  the  United  States.  This  was  all  they 
wanted.  They  "seceded,"  and  only  asked  to  be  "let 
alone."  They  sent  Commissioners  from  South  Carolina, 
the  leader  in  secession,  to  "  negotiate"  a  partition  of  the 
public  property  of  the  Union.  As  above  related,  we  have 
seen  how  this  mission  failed,  and  the  immediate  occasion 
of  the  failure. 


FURTHER   NEGOTIATIONS.  125 

Passing  these  incidents  by,  and  coming  to  the  root  of 
the  matter,  what  the  South  sought,  in  the  way  they  sought 
it,  could  not  be  granted ;  for  the  President  truly  says  he 
had  been  invested  with  no  such  authority.  ISTor  had  Con 
gress.  The  Constitution  gives  no  such  power  either  to  the 
Executive  or  Legislative  branch  of  the  Government ;  nor 
to  both  combined.  The  position  of  President  Buchanan 
was  therefore  conclusive  of  the  whole  matter,  as  between 
the  South  Carolina  Commissioners  and  the  Government  of 
the  United  States  to  which  they  were  accredited. 

There  was  but  one  conceivable  way  to  reach  the  end 
Bought  by  the  secessionists,  if  they  meant  peace.  Any 
other  course  than  that  one,  was  rebellion,  revolution,  and 
war.  We  shall  speak  of  that  one  way,  after  noticing  fur 
ther  negotiations  which  were  attempted.  All  we  need  to 
say  just  here  is,  that  the  Southern  leaders  never  took  one 
step  toward  the  only  possible  way  for  a  peaceful  solution 
of  the  question  of  separation. 

FURTHER     NEGOTIATIONS — 'CONFEDERATE     COMMISSIONERS. 

After  seven  States  had  seceded,  the  "  Government  of  the 
Confederate  States  of  America,"  as  they  styled  it,  was 
formed  at  Montgomery,  Alabama. 

After  the  inauguration  of  President  Lincoln,  that  Gov 
ernment  sent  Commissioners  to  Washington.  They  were 
Messrs.  Forsyth  and  Crawford.  They  arrive,  and  under 
date  of  "  Washington  City,  March  12,  1861,"  they  address 
a  letter  to  Mr.  Seward,  the  Secretary  of  State,  in  which 
they  say :  "  The  undersigned  have  been  duly  accredited 
by  the  Government  of  the  Confederate  States  of  America, 
as  Commissioners  to  the  Government  of  the  United 
States  ;"  and  through  the  Secretary,  they  "  make  known  to 
the  President  of  the  United  States,  the  objects  of  their 
presence  in  this  Capital."  They  proceed  to  state,  that 


126  RESPONSIBILITY    FOE   THE    WAK. 

"seven  States  of  the  late  Federal  Union"  have  "with 
drawn  from  the  United  States,"  and  "  have  formed  a  Gov 
ernment  of  their  own  ;"  and  they  declare,  that  "  the  Con 
federate  States  constitute  an  independent  nation,  de  facto 
and  de  jure,  and  possess  a  Government  perfect  in  all  its 
parts,  and  endowed  with  the  means  of  self-support." 

After  giving  this  official  information,  they  announce  the 
great  object  of  their  mission  thus  : 

With  a  view  to  a  speedy  adjustment  of  aU  questions  GROWING  OUT  OF 
this  political  separation,  upon  such  terms  of  amity  and  good-will  as  the 
respective  interests,  geographical  contiguity,  and  future  welfare  of  the 
two  nations  may  render  necessary,  the  undersigned  are  instructed  to 
make  to  the  Government  of  the  United  States,  overtures  for  the  open 
ing  of  negotiations,  assuring  the  Government  of  the  United  States  that 
the  President,  Congress,  and  people  of  the  Confederate  States,  earnestly 
desire  a  peaceful  solution  of  these  great  questions. 

It  can  scarcely  be  supposed,  for  a  moment,  that  these 
Commissioners,  or  the  "  Government"  they  represented, 
expected  u  negotiations"  to  be  opened  with  them  by  the 
Government  of  the  United  States,  based  upon  any  acknow 
ledgment,  open  or  tacit,  of  the  political  status  which  they 
assumed  to  exist.  After  the  failure  to  negotiate  with  Mr. 
Buchanan,  on  the  ground  which  he  announced  to  the 
South  Carolina  Commissioners, — that  he  had  no  authority 
in  the  case, — Messrs.  Forsyth  and  Crawford  could  not 
have  anticipated  a  different  result  with  the  Administration 
of  President  Lincoln,  unless,  possibly,  they  supposed  the 
Government  might  be  frightened  into  a  recognition  of  their 
de  facto  and  de  jure  "  nation,"  by  reason  of  the  more 
formidable  proportions  which  the  rebellion  had  now  as 
sumed.  But  if  such  was  their  expectation,  they  soon 
learned  their  mistake. 

Mr.  Seward  took  respectful  notice  of  their  letter,  in  a 
"  Memorandum"  he  penned  and  sent  to  them,  though  not 


FURTHER   NEGOTIATIONS.  127 

signed  officially  or  in  any  other  way,  but  dated  at  the 
"Department  of  State,"  March  15,  1861.  He  declines 
their  request  for  an  official  interview,  saying  it  is,  "  upon 
exclusively  public  consideration,  respectfully  declined." 
He  states  that  "he  understands  the  events  which  have 
recently  occurred,  and  the  condition  of  political  affairs," 
<fcc.,  "  very  differently  from  the  aspect  in  which  they  are 
presented  by  Messrs.  Forsyth  and  Crawford.  He  sees  in 
them,  not  a  rightful  and  accomplished  revolution  and  an 
independent  nation,  with  an  established  Government,  but 
rather  a  perversion  of  a  temporary  and  partisan  excitement 
to  the  inconsiderate  purposes  of  an  unjustifiable  and  uncon 
stitutional  aggression  upon  the  rights  and  authority  vested 
in  the  Federal  Government."  The  Secretary  then  says  to 
those  gentlemen  that  "  he  looks  patiently  but  confidently 
for  the  cure"  of  existing  evils,  "  not  to  irregular  negotia 
tions,"  prosecuted  "  in  derogation  of  the  Constitution  and 
laws,  but  to  regular  and  considerate  action  of  the  people 
of  those  States,  in  co-operation  with  their  brethren  in  the 
other  States,  through  the  Congress  of  the  United  States, 
and  such  extraordinary  Conventions,  if  there  shall  be  need 
thereof  as  the  Federal  Constitution  contemplates  and 
authorizes  to  be  assembled."  He  then  refers  them  to 
President  Lincoln's  Inaugural  Address,  from  which  they 
would  perceive  that  he  could  not  admit  the  political  status 
they  assumed, — "  that  the  States  referred  to  by  them  have, 
in  law  or  in  fact,  withdrawn  from  the  Federal  Union," — 
"  or  that  they  could  do  so  in  the  manner  described  by 
Messrs.  Forsyth  and  Crawford,  or  in  any  other  manner 
than  with  the  consent  and  concert  of  the  people  of  the  Uni 
ted  States,  to  be  given  through  a  National  Convention,  to 
be  assembled  in  conformity  with  the  provisions  of  the  Con 
stitution  of  the  United  States."  He  closes  his  "Memo 
randum"  byfc  saying  that  the  President  "  coincides  gener- 


128  KESPONSIBILITY    FOK    THE    WAR. 

ally  in  the  views  it  expresses,  and  sanctions  the  Secretary's 
decision  declining  official  intercourse  with  Messrs.  Forsyth 
and  Crawford." 

PEACEFUL    SOLUTION    DECLINED. 

The  case  was  thus  a  plain  one,  as  between  war  and 
peace.  There  was  one  course  open  for  peaceful  negotia 
tions  recognized  by  the  Constitution.  To  that,  the  Gov 
ernment  of  the  United  States  was  shut  up ;  but  into  that, 
though  invited,  the  secessionists  would  not  enter.  If  a 
possibility  existed  of  a  peaceful  separation,  through  "  nego 
tiation,"  it  was  in  the  way  the  Secretary  of  State  men 
tioned,  and  which  the  President  in  his  Inaugural  Address 
suggested, — through  a  National  Convention  of  the  people 
of  all  the  States, — and  there  was  no  other  way  under  the 
Constitution. 

It  is  true,  that  the  Constitution  does  not  contemplate 
the  disruption  of  the  Union  in  any  manner ;  does  not  pro 
vide  for  even  considering  the  question  of  separation,  or 
"  secession  ;"  it  says  nothing  about  it ;  and  it  may  be  that 
a  National  Convention,  held  under  the  provisions  of  the 
Constitution,  would  have  no  authority  to  entertain  the 
question  in  any  shape.  It  has  been  insisted,  however, 
that,  as  the  people  in  a  National  Convention  made  the 
Constitution,  and  the  people  of  the  several  States  ratified 
it,  the  people  of  the  United  States  and  of  the  several 
States  have  the  power,  through  the  same  process,  to 
undo  the  work  of  their  hands,  to  take  down  the  edifice 
they  erected,  and  to  dissolve  the  Union.  If  this  be  so, 
it  is  a  peaceful  mode  of  separation.  But  whether  there  be 
any  Constitutional  mode  of  separation  or  not, — and  if 
there  be,  this  seems  to  be  the  only  one  inferrible  from 
the  instrument  itself,— -this  was  the  course  to  which  the  Ad 
ministration  in  power  was  willing  to  resort,, for  the  con- 


PEACEFUL    SOLUTION   DECLINED.  129 

sideration  of  all  grievances  between  tbe  Government  and 
the  complaining  States ;  and  it  was  a  measure  of  peace. 
But  the  Southern  leaders  never  took  one  step,  or  expressed 
any  desire,  for  a  National  Convention,  but  always  spurned 
every  suggestion  of  the  subject. 

Nor  did  they  propose  any  other  measure  for  a  peaceful 
solution  of  the  vital  issue  between  them  and  the  Govern 
ment;  that  issue  which  was  regarded  as  underlying  all 
other  questions  in  debate.  But  they  took  the  ground, 
openly  and  defiantly,  that  they  were  "  out  of  the  Union" 
by  their  own  act ;  that  they  were  separated  already  from 
the  jurisdiction  of  the  United  States ;  that  they  had 
"  seceded,"  and  that  was  the  end  of  controversy.  Suppose 
they  were  in  fact  right, — that  "  secession"  was  their 
proper  remedy, — but  yet  that  they  could  not  convince  the 
opposite  party,  the  Government  of  the  United  States,  of 
the  truth  of  their  position.  There  were  then  two  parties 
to  the  case.  The  Government  did  not  and  could  not  agree 
with  them.  How,  then,  do  honest  men,  disposed  to  peace, 
act,  when  they  cannot  agree  ?  Before  resorting  to  extreme 
measures,  they  exhaust  every  possible  effort  for  a  peaceful 
settlement.  Did  the  South  do  this  ?  Who  could  be  an 
umpire,  for  a  peaceful  solution,  between  them  and  the 
Government  ?  Only  the  whole  people,  represented  in  a 
National  Convention.  Did  they  agree  to  this?  They 
spurned  it.  Did  they  propose  any  other  measure?  None 
whatever.  Nothing  short  of  a  direct,  full,  immediate,  un 
conditional  yielding  to  them  of  the  whole  case  in  con 
troversy,  as  one  of  the  parties,  would  satisfy  them.  Does 
this  carry  on  its  front  the  compelling  conviction  that  they 
were  for  peace,  and  the  Government  was  for  war  ? 

Were  this  simple  question  submitted  to  any  disinterested 
body  of  twelve  men,  in  any  nation  under  heaven,  they 
would  give  a  verdict  against  the  rebel  pretension. 


130  RESPONSIBILITY   FOE   THE    WAR. 


UNJUSTIFIABLE    REASONS   FOR    REFUSAL. 

It  may  possibly  be  said,  in  answer  to  this,  that  the  as 
sembling  of  a  National  Convention  would  have  been 
useless  ;  that  the  majority  of  the  people  were  no  doubt 
against  "  secession,"  and  with  the  Government,  and  there 
fore  the  South  would  not  have  obtained  "  their  rights"  in 
that  manner. 

To  this  we  reply,  first,  that  such  an  opinion  could  not  jus 
tify  a  refusal  to  make  the  trial.  Those  who,  if  any,  enter 
tained  it,  might  have  found  themselves  mistaken.  Our  own 
conviction  is,  that  had  the  whole  people,  represented  in  a 
National  Convention,  been  brought  face  to  face  with  the 
alternative  of  some  peaceful  settlement  or  civil  war,  one  of 
two  things  would  have  occurred :  either,  propositions  of 
"  compromise"  would  have  been  agreed  upon,  satisfactory 
to  the  vast  majority  of  the  South, — which  the  Southern 
leaders  no  doubt  feared, — or,  a  proposition  for  an  amicable 
separation  would  have  passed.  We  do  not  say  that  a 
"  compromise,"  if  subsequently  ratified,  would  have  been 
well.  It  would  only  have  postponed  the  evil  day.  Nor 
do  we  say  it  would  have  been  wise  to  dissolve  this  one 
nation  and  make  two.  It  might  have  saved  us  the  present 
strife,  and  its  untold  horrors,  but  numerous  and  bitter 
wars  would  no  doubt  have  followed.  All  we  mean  to  say, 
is,  that  we  believe  the  people,  compelled  to  face  this 
"  rugged  issue,"  would  have  chosen  the  peaceful  side  of 
the  alternative,  in  one  of  these  two  modes. 

But,  secondly,  even  if  the  Southern  people  had  failed  in 
Convention,  either  to  gain  a  satisfactory  "  compromise" 
or  an  acquiescence  in  their  "  secession,"  and  had  thereupon 
felt  compelled  to  withdraw  from  the  Convention  and  enact 
and  carry  out  "secession"  in  the  way  they  are  now  doing, 
they  would,  in  that  case, — if  able  to  exhibit  a  clear  record 


THE    COMMISSIONERS    DEFIANTLY    COURT   WAR.        131 

of  unendurable  wrongs, — have  made  a  far  better  showing, 
and  would  have  had  a  deeper  sympathy  from  the  civilized 
world,  than  is  now  possible;  and  more  especially  so,  in 
the  matter  of  showing  a  disposition  for  peace. 

But  as  the  facts  now  stand,  it  is  the  baldest  of  all  pos 
sible  pretensions,  the  most  naked  and  monstrous  proposi 
tion  ever  penned  by  sober  and  Christian  men,  to  assert  that 
they  were  all  the  while  for  peace,  while  the  Government 
was  all  the  while  for  war.  The  Government  was  driven 
into  war,  to  save  its  authority,  to  recover  its  property,  to 
maintain  its  honor,  to  preserve  its  existence  ;  and  the  Ad 
ministration,  constitutionally  put  in  power  by  the  people, 
could  do  no  less,  under  its  oaths  of  office,  than  to  guard 
and  defend  these  interests  to  the  last.  But  the  conspira 
tors  against  the  Government  could  not  be  coaxed  or  goaded 
into  any  measure  for  peace;  but  to  be  ulet  alone,"  after 
they  had  stolen  all  they  could  grasp,  and  would  subvert 
forever  the  authority  of  the  Government  throughout  half 
the  territory  of  its  jurisdiction,  was  the  least  of  their 
modest  demands. 

THE    COMMISSIONERS   DEFIANTLY    COURT   WAR. 

If  any  further  evidence  be  desired  to  show  the  deter 
mination  of  the  South  for  war,  we  find  it  officially  certified, 
by  the  Confederate  Commissioners.  In  reply  to  Mr. 
Seward's  "Memorandum"  of  March  15th,  1861,  they  ad 
dress  him  a  long  and  their  final  note,  dated  April  9th. 
They  assert  that  the  people  of  seven  States  "  have  rejected 
the  authority  of  the  United  States  and  established  a  Gov 
ernment  of  their  own."  Mr.  Seward  had  referred  them  to 
a  National  Convention  as  the  only  Constitutional  method 
for  negotiation.  Notwithstanding  this,  they  complain, 
that,  while  they  had  come  "  with  the  olive-branch  of 
peace,"  the  Government, — which  the  Secretary  of  State 


132  RESPONSIBILITY   FOR   THE    WAE. 

had  assured  them  had  no  authority  in  the  premises, — 
would  not  treat  with  them,  nor  "recognize  the  great 
fact  of  a  complete  and  successful  revolution." 

To  show  whether  the  leaves  of  this  "  olive-branch"  were 
fresh  or  withered,  observe  what  they  further  say  : 

The  undersigned  would  omit  the  performance  of  an  obvious  duty, 
were  they  to  fail  to  make  known  to  the  Government  of  the  United 
States,  that  the  people  of  the  Confederate  States  have  declared  their 
independence  with  a  full  knowledge  of  all  the  responsibilities  of  that  act,  and 
with  as  firm  a  determination  to  maintain  it  by  all  the  means  with 
which  nature  has  endowed  them,  as  that  which  sustained  their  fathers 
when  they  threw  off  the  authority  of  the  British  crown.  *  *  *  The 
President  of  the  United  States  knows  that  Fort  Sumter  cannot  be  pro 
visioned  without  the  effusion  of  blood. 

That  is,  if  the  United  States  shall  deign  to  send  provi 
sions  to  its  starving  garrison,  they  will,  if  possible,  prevent 
it  by  force.  This  is  the  kind  of  "  peace"  in  the  interest 
of  which  these  gentlemen  present  the  "  olive-branch,"  and 
for  which  they  stand  ready  to  "  negotiate"  if  the  President 
will  but  receive  them. 

A   DIPLOMATIC    QUIBBLE. 

There  is  one  feature  of  this  diplomatic  note  which 
exhibits  true  Southern  chivalry.  The  Commissioners  say 
to  the  Secretary  of  State,  that  they  understand  him  to 
decline  any  interview : 

Because,  to  do  so,  would  be  to  recognize  the  independence  and 
separate  nationality  of  the  Confederate  States.  This  is  the  vein  of 
thought  that  pervades  the  memorandum  before  us.  The  truth  of  his 
tory  requires  that  it  should  distinctly  appear  upon  the  record,  that  the 
undersigned  did  not  ask  the  Government  of  the  United  States  to  re 
cognize  the  independence  of  the  Confederate  States.  They  only  asked 
audience  to  adjust,  in  a  spirit  of  amity  and  peace,  the  new  relations 
springing  from  a  manifest  and  accomplished  revolution  in  the  Government 
of  the  LATE  Federal  Union. 


A   DIPLOMATIC    QUIBBLE.  133 

How  humiliating  it  is  to  see  the  Plenipotentiaries  of  a 
"first-class  Power"  resort  to  such  miserable  quibbling. 
In  their  first  note,  they  declare  at  the  opening,  that  they 
"have  been  duly  accredited  by  the  Government  of  the 
Confederate  States,"  and  they  ask  at  the  close,  a  day  to 
be  appointed,  "in  order  that  they  may  present  to  the 
President  of  the  United  States  the  credentials  which  they 
bear,  and  the  objects  of  the  mission  with  which  they  are 
charged."  In  their  second  and  final  note,  they  say  to 
Secretary  Seward,  at  its  opening :  "  You  correctly  state 
the  purport  of  the  official  note  addressed  to  you  by  the 
undersigned  on  the  12th  ult."  They  close  this  note  by 
saying :  "  The  undersigned,  Commissioners  of  the  Con. 
federate  States  of  America,  having  thus  made  answer 
to  all  they  deem  material  in  the  memorandum  filed  in 
the  Department  on  the  15th  of  March  last,  have  the 
honor  to  be,"  &c.  And  throughout  the  body  of  both 
notes  they  assert  the  nationality  of  the  "  Confederate 
States"  they  represent,  both  de  facto  and  de  jure,  and 
formally  declare  the  grounds  on  which  they  assert 
such  claim.  And  yet,  in  the  face  of  all  this,  they  declare 
that  they  "  did  not  ask  the  Government  of  the  United 
States  to  recognize  the  independence  of  the  Confederate 
States." 

What  a  paltry  piece  of  finesse  for  "chivalric"  gentle 
men!  Suppose  they  "  did  not  ask"  this,  in  terms,  did  not 
the  whole  proceeding  on  their  part  imply  that  such  was 
their  demand  ?  And  had  the  United  States  Government 
held  any  intercourse  with  them,  without  an  express  dis 
claimer,  would  it  not  have  been  pleaded  as  a  virtual  re 
cognition?  This  is  on  a  par  with  their  pretension  that 
they  bear  "  the  olive-branch  of  peace"  while  they  threaten 
the  Government  with  an  "  effusion  of  blood."  It  is  like 
every  thing  else  connected  with  "  secession"  from  first  to 


134  RESPONSIBILITY   FOR   THE    WAR. 

last, — a  lie  and  a  cheat ;  mendacity  and  hypocrisy,  diplo 
matically  combined. 

It  is  further  noticeable  here,  that  these  Commissioners 
had  got  beyond  the  "  secession"  stage  of  the  fever,  which 
is  always  claimed  to  be  a  peaceful  type  of  this  Southern 
malady.  They  speak  of  "  seven  States"  having  effected 
"  a  complete  and  successful  revolution  y"  and  of  an  "  ac 
complished  revolution"  &c.  They  use  these  terms,  not 
with  reference  to  any  aspect  of  the  case  occasioned  by 
their  failure  to  negotiate  with  the  Government,  nor  in 
consequence  of  the  hostile  attitude  which  they  charge  the 
Government  with  having  taken ;  but  they  claim  this  as  the 
status  of  the  seceded  States  from  the  first.  "  Secession," 
then,  when  defined  by  themselves,  is  "  revolution ;"  and 
this  revolution,  like  most  others,  was  begun  and  has  been 
carried  on  till  now  by  acts  of  war.  "Revolution,"  says 
a  distinguished  writer,  "  always  implies  rebellion,  and  re 
bellion  is  war." 

PUBLIC   FACTS   DECIDE   THE   CASE, 

But  take  any  view  of  the  case  which  the  facts  disclose ; 
trace  the  history  of  the  movement  from  the  first  demon 
strations  immediately  after  the  Presidential  election, 
November  6th,  1860,  to  the  attack  upon  Fort  Sumter, 
April  12th,  1861 ;  call  to  mind  the  seizures  of  every  de 
scription  of  the  property  of  the  United  States,  made  at 
every  stage  between  these  dates,  within  rebel  reach,  upon 
land  and  water ;  note  the  pulling  down  of  the  United 
States  flag  from  every  place  where  it  floated,  on  Custom- 
Houses,  Post-Offices,  Arsenals,  Mints,  Forts,  and  Vessels 
of  War,  and  the  unfurling  upon  them  instead,  the  flags  of 
the  respective  States  where  this  public  property  was 
located,  from  the  Potomac  to  the  Rio  Grande,  and  from 
the  Missouri  to  Cape  Sable ;  estimate  the  thousands  of 


REBEL    CONDITIONS    OF    PEACE.  135 

troops  called  out,  mustered,  organized,  drilled,  and  equip 
ped  with  all  the  munitions  of  war,  in  every  State  which 
seceded;  observe  the  formation  of  the  Confederate  States 
Government,  and  the  adoption  of  a  Constitution  other 
than  that  of  the  United  States,  and  the  establishment  of 
the  offices  and  the  exercise  of  all  the  functions  of  an  inde 
pendent  nationality ;  bear  in  mind  that  the  seizures  of  this 
United  States  property  and  the  organizing  of  these  armies, 
iirst  undertaken  by  the  separate  States,  and  afterwards 
sanctioned  and  adopted  by  the  Government  of  the  Con 
federate  States,  was  for  the  purpose  of  maintaining  the 
independent  authority  which  this  new  Government  had 
assumed ;  and  then,  having  pondered  the  case  well,  let 
any  honest  man  ask  himself  if  all  this  means  peace? — or, 
if  this  be  not  revolution,  and  these  the  movements  which 
were  undertaken  to  maintain  and  defend  this  revolution, 
by  all  the  appliances  of  war  f 

That  is  one  side.  The  other  is  equally  clear,  and  more 
briefly  told.  The  first  act  of  war  undertaken  by  the  Gov 
ernment  of  the  United  States  was  on  the  15th  of  April, 
1861,  in  the  calling  out  of  the  first  body  of  troops;  and 
that  was  done  simply  to  repel  the  open  assaults  of  its 
enemies,  to  recover  its  stolen  property,  and  to  maintain 
its  rightful  authority;  with,  even  then,  "twenty  days" 
given,  which  might  have  prevented  collision.  No  Gov 
ernment  on  earth,  called  as  an  umpire,  could  give  any 
other  judgment  between  the  parties  upon  the  simple  ques 
tion  of  peace  and  war. 

REBEL   CONDITIONS    OF   PEACE    SINCE    THE    WAR   BEGAN. 

The  rebels  have  talked  much  of  a  desire  for  peace,  ever 
since  the  war  has  been  in  progress.  To  show  on  what 
terms  they  would  conclude  peace,  we  insert  the  conditions 


136  RESPONSIBILITY   FOR   THE   WAR. 

given  in  the  Richmond  Enquirer,  of  the  16th  of  October 
last.     That  paper  says  : 

Save  on  our  own  terms  we  can  accept  no  peace  whatever,  and  must 
fight  till  doomsday  rather  than  yield   an  iota  of  them ;  and  our  terms 
are:  1.  Recognition  by  the  enemy  of  the   independence  of  the  Con 
federate  States.     2.  Withdrawal  of  the  Yankee  forces  from  every  foot 
of  Confederate  ground,  including  Kentucky  and  Missouri.     3.  Withdrawal 
of  the  Yankee  soldiers  from  Maryland,  until  that  State  shall  decide  by 
a  free  vote  whether  she  shall  remain  in  the  old  Union  or  ask  admission 
into  the  Confederacy.     4.  Consent  on  the  part  of  the  Federal  Govern 
ment  to  give  up  to  the  Confederacy   its   proportion  of  the  Navy  as  it 
stood  at  the  time  of  Secession,  or  to  pay  for  the  same.     5.  Yielding  up 
all  pretension  on  the  part  of  the  Federal  Government  to  that  portion 
of  the  old  Territories  which  lies  West  of  the   Confederate  States.     6. 
An  equitable  settlement,  on  the  basis  of  our  absolute  independence  and 
equal  rights,  of  all  accounts  of  the  public  debt  and  public  lands,  and  the 
advantages  accruing  from  foreign  treaties.     *     *     *     These  provisions, 
we  apprehend,  comprise  the  minimum  of  what  we  must  require  before 
we  lay  down  our  arms.     That  is  to  say,  THE  NORTH  MUST  YIELD  ALL 
— WE  NOTHING.     The  whole  pretension  of  that  country  to  prevent  by 
force  the  separation  of  the  States  must  be  abandoned,  which  will  be 
equivalent  to  an  avowal  that  our  enemies  were  wrong  from  the  first ; 
and,  of  course,  as  they  waged  a  causeless  and  wicked  war  upon  us, 
they  ought  in  strict  justice  to  be  required,  according  to  usage  in  such 
cases,  to  reimburse  to  u-s  the  whole  of  our  expenses  and  losses  in  the  course  of 
that  war.     Whether  this  last  proviso  is  to  be  insisted  upon  or  not,  cer 
tain  we  are  that  we  cannot  have  any  peace  at  all  until  we  shall  be  in  a 
position  not  only  to  demand  and  exact,  but  also  to  enforce  and  collect 
treasure  for  our  own  reimbursement  out  of  the  wealthy  cities  in  the 
enemy's  country.     In  other  words,  unless  we  can  destroy  or  scatter 
their  armies,  and  break  up  their  Government,  we  can  have  no  peace  ;  and 
if  we  can  do  that,  then  we   ought  not  only  to  extort  from  them  our 
own  full  terms  and  ample  acknowledgment  of  their  wrong,  but  also  a 
handsome  indemnity  for  the  trouble  and  expense  caused  to  us  by  their 
crime.     *     *     *     Once  more  we  say,  IT  is  ALL,  OR  NOTHING.     This 
Confederacy  or  the  Yankee  nation,  one  or  the  other,  goes  down,  down 
to  perdition.     That  is  to  say,  one  or  the  other  must  forfeit  its  national 
existence,  and  lie  at  the  mercy  of  its  mortal  enemy.     *     *     *     As 
surely  as  we  completely  ruin  their  armies, — and  without  that,  is  no 


THE  REBEL  PRESIDENT  ON  PEACE.         137 

peace  or  truce  at  all, — so  surely  shall  we  make  them  pay  our  war  debt 
though  we  wring  it  out  of  their  hearts. 

All  loyal  men  will  of  course  cheerfully  accept  the  alter 
native  here  presented,  that  "  one  or  the  other"  of  these 
"  nations"  "  goes  down  ;"  and  that  there  can  be  peace  in  no 
other  way.  It  has  been  our  opinion  from  the  beginning, 
that  there  is  no  other  road  to  "peace"  but  to  "  conquer" 
it;  to  crush  the  military  power  of  the  rebellion,  which 
means  to  crush  the  leaders.  They  will  fight  as  long  as  they 
can  keep  their  armies  together ;  but  the  time  may  come 
when  the  people,  who  have  been  their  dupes,  will  rise  up 
and  themselves  dispose  of  them. 

These  "  terms  of  peace"  are  instructive  to  two  classes, — 
the  truly  loyal  and  the  "  peace"  men.  These  "  terms"  un 
doubtedly  express  the  -views  of  the  rebel  leaders.  They 
show  to  the  loyal  the  utter  hopelessness  of  any  conditions 
emanating  from  the  South,  which  can  for  a  moment  claim 
serious  consideration ;  and  they  thus  show  the  paramount 
duty  of  every  citizen,  in  sustaining  the  Government  in  its 
efforts  to  crush  the  rebellion,  that  peace  may  be  attained. 
They  show  to  that  class  who  are  always  crying  "  peace," 
and  who  are  mourning  over  the  grievous  burdens  of  the 
Government,  to  what  a  repast  of  taxation  and  plunder  they 
are  invited  by  their  Southern  friends. 

THE  REBEL  PRESIDENT  AND  REBEL  CONGRESS  ON  PEACE. 

These  "  terms"  also  explain  what  has  been  meant  by  the 
rebel  President  and  his  Congress  when  they  have  spoken 
of  "  peace,"  and  when  they  have  attempted  to  make  capital 
for  foreign  consumption  out  of  their  complaints  against  the 
United  States  Government,  that  the  precious  boon  could 
not  be  obtained  by  them. 

In  an  u  Address  of  Congress  to  the  People  of  the  Con- 


138  RESPONSIBILITY   FOR   THE    WAE. 

federate  States,"  issued  from  Richmond  in  February  last, 
it  is  said  : 

This  cruel  war  has  been  waged  against  us,  and  its  continuance  has 
been  seized  upon  as  a  pretext  by  some  discontented  persons  to  excite 
hostility  to  the  Government.  Eecent  and  public  as  have  been  the  occur 
rences,  it  is  strange  that  a  misapprehension  exists  as  to  the  conduct  of 
the  two  Governments  in  reference  to  peace.  Allusion  has  been  made 
to  the  unsuccessful  efforts,  when  separation  took  place,  to  procure  an 
amicable  adjustment  of  all  matters  in  dispute.  These  attempts  at  nego 
tiation  do  not  comprise  all  that  has  been  done.  In  every  form  in  which 
expression  could  be  given  to  the  sentiments, — in  public  meetings,  through 
the  press,  by  legislative  resolves, — the  desire  of  this  people  for  peace, 
for  the  uninterrupted  enjoyment  of  their  rights  and  prosperity,  has  been 
made  known. 

We  know  what  they  regard  as  "  their  rights,"  and  there 
fore  know  what  kind  of  "  peace"  they  have  desired  and 
manifested  in  all  these  modes.  They  are  set  forth  in  the 
"  terms"  above  given. 

Then  the  Address  of  this  Congress  goes  on  to  say  that 
President  Davis  has  joined  in  this  pervading  "  desire,"  and 
many  times  expressed  it  in  his  State  papers  : 

The  President,  more  authoritatively,  in  several  of  his  messages,  while 
protesting  the  utter  absence  of  all  desire  to  interfere  with  the  United 
States,  or  acquire  any  of  their  territory,  has  avowed  that  the  "advent  of 
peace  will  be  hailed  with  joy.  Our.  desire  for  it  has  never  been  concealed. 
Our  efforts  to  avoid  the  war,  forced  on  us  as  it  was  by  the  lust  of  con 
quest  and  the  insane  passions  of  our  foes,  are  known  to  mankind." 

And  having  thus  spoken  of  their  President,  of  themselves, 
and  their  people,  they  speak  of  the  Government  of  the 
United  States,  as  follows  : 

The  course  of  the  Federal  Government  has  proved  that  it  did  not  de 
sire  peace,  and  would  not  consent  to  it  on  any  terms  that  we  could  possibly 
concede.  In  proof  of  this,  we  refer  to  tho  repeated  rejection  of  all  terms 
of  conciliation  and  compromise ;  to  their  recent  contemptuous  refusal  to 
receive  the  Vice-President,  who  was  sent  to  negotiate  for  softening  the 


THEY    MISREPRESENT   THE    CASE.  139 

asperities  of  the  war ;  and  their  scornful  rejection  of  the  offer  of  a  neu 
tral  power  to  mediate  between  the  contending  parties. 

THEY    MISREPRESENT    THE     CASE. 

If  the  gentlemen  composing  the  Congress  that  issued  this 
Address,  or  Mr.  Davis  in  his  Message,  can  seriously  believe 
that  any  person  who  understands  the  case  will  be  duped 
by  such  representations,  it  is  evidence  that  rebel  infatuation 
has  gone  deeper  into  their  souls  than  we  had  supposed.  To 
protest,  as  they  do,  that  there  is  in  them  an  "  utter  absence 
of  all  desire  to  interfere  with  the  United  States,  or  acquire 
any  of  their  territory"  and  to  charge  that  "  the  lust  of 
conquest"  is  the  motive  of  the  United  States  in  prosecuting 
the  war,  is  to  assume  the  whole  matter  in  dispute.  They 
make  it  a  condition  precedent  to  negotiation  for  "  peace," 
or  even  to  negotiation  "for  softening  the  asperities  of  the 
war,"  that  the  United  States  shall  give  up  the  vital  point 
at  issue  between  the  parties.  If  they  will  but  do  that,  at 
the  outset,  then  the  door  will  be  open  for  settling  all  matters 
of  detail. 

The  whole  question  in  issue  is  one  involving  nationality, 
and  hence  of  territorial  jurisdiction.  The  United  States 
claim  jurisdiction  over  the  whole  country.  The  Confede 
rates  claim  jurisdiction  over  a  part  of  it.  Which  claim  is 
just,  is  not  now  material;  nor  is  it  material,  here,  which 
party  began  the  war.  The  parties  are  at  war,  to  determine 
the  claim ;  the  South  fighting  for  their  independence,  the 
United  States  for  maintaining  their  rule  intact  over  the 
whole  country. 

These  being  the  facts,  the  point  in  hand  is,  Which  party 
is  bent  on  war,  and  which  is  burning  with  a  desire  for 
peace?  The  "Confederate  States"  charge  the  United 
States  with  a  wilful  indisposition  to  peace,  and  a  ferocious 

thirst  for  war  ;  and  insist,  before  all  the  world,  that   they 
7* 


140  RESPONSIBILITY   FOR   THE    WAR. 

are  anxious  for  peace,  and  they  only.  The  solution  is  simple. 
Our  amazement  is,  that  men,  in  their  official  acts  and  man 
ifestoes,  should  not  admit  the  truth  in  so  plain  a  case.  That 
the  "  desire  for  peace"  is  mutual,  is  unquestionable.  The 
determination  for  "  war"  is  also  mutual,  and  the  alternative 
on  which  its  prosecution  rests  is  the  same  with  both  par 
ties  ;  the  "  Confederate  States"  determined  to  prosecute  it 
until  they  gain  their  independence,  and  establish  their  na 
tionality  unmolested  over  a  part  of  the  country,  and  the 
United  States  determined  to  prosecute  it  until  they  regain 
their  rule  over  the  whole  country.  So  far  as  declarations 
and  corresponding  acts  go,  this  mutual  determination  is  as 
plain  as  terms  can  make  any  proposition.  What  the  final 
result  will  be, — which  party  will  carry  out  its  determination 
to  the  end,  and  triumphantly,  or  whether  either  will, — are 
matters  foreign  to  the  present  point. 

Now  in  view  of  these  indisputable  facts,  it  is  worse  than 
idle  for  either  party  to  monopolize  all  the  "desire  for 
peace,"  as  the  case  now  stands,  and  to  charge  the  other  with 
possessing  the  sole  passion  for  "  war."  Both  the  desire 
and  the  determination  mentioned  are  mutual,  when  we  con 
sider  the  ends  at  wThich  the  parties  are  aiming.  We  are, 
therefore,  somewhat  surprised  that  sensible  men, — and  Mr. 
Davis  and  his  Congress  claim  to  be  sensible, — should  make 
so  lame  an  attempt,  in  official  documents,  to  mislead  the 
world  on  so  plain  a  point ;  to  charge  that  the  United  States 
are  ferocious,  while  they  are  so  lamb-like.  The  United 
States  are  ready  for  peace  at  any  moment,  on  their  terms  ; 
and  the  rebels  are  ready  for  peace  on  their  terms*;  and,  at 
present,  both  are  determined  for  war,  until  their  respective 
terms  shall  be  granted. 

This  is  the  whole  case  as  it  now  stands ;  and  he  who 
represents  it  otherwise,  writes  himself  down  a  falsifier  of 
the  plainest  public  facts. 


THE  QUESTION  IGNORED  BY  THE  REBELS.      141 


THE  REAL  QUESTION  IGNORED  BY  THE  REBELS. 

While  the  question  of  nationality  plainly  underlies  the 
whole  contest,  and  while  to  settle  it  the  war  is  prosecuted, 
the  rebels  constantly  attempt  to  ignore  this  question.  Mr. 
Davis  does  this  in  his  Message  above  quoted,  when  insist 
ing  that  the  United  States  are  prosecuting  a  war  of  "  con 
quest."  The  rebel  Congress  do  the  same  in  their  Address, 
as  seen  in  their  illustrations  to  prove  the  charge  that  the 
Federal  Government  "  did  not  desire  peace."  They  refer, 
as  an  example,  to  the  "  contemptuous  refusal  to  receive  the 
Vice-President,  who  was  sent  to  negotiate  for  softening 
the  asperities  of  the  war."  Why  was  he  not  received,  and 
why  is  the  "  refusal"  deemed  "  contemptuous  ?"  Look  at 
the  facts. 

Mr.  Stephens  was  in  James  River,  on  a  "  Confederate 
steamer"  called  the  Torpedo,  with  a  "  Confederate  flag" 
flying.  From  that  vessel,  under  a  flag  of  truce,  he  sent  a 
letter  to  an  officer  of  the  United  States  Navy,  asking  per 
mission  to  come  up  to  Washington  in  his  vessel,  and  deliver 
his  credentials,  embracing  a  letter  from  Jefferson  Davis, 
"  President  of  the  Confederate  States,"  to  Abraham  Lin 
coln,  President  of  the  United  States,  and  as  a  Minister  of 
one  Government  to  open  negotiations  with  the  other. 
This  was  in  July,  1863.  That  is  to  say — He  was  there  in 
his  official  character  as  Ambassador,  upon  a  national  ves 
sel  of  the  Confederate  States,  bearing  official  dispatches 
from  his  Government  to  that  of  the  United  States,  to  nego 
tiate  upon  matters  of  the  highest  national  concern,  namely-) 
of  peace  and  war.  This  is  the  rebel  view  of  the  case. 

Had  he  been  received,  in  the  manner  sought,  it  would 
have  been  equivalent  to  a  concession  of  all  the  rebels  claimed 
on  the  simple  issue  of  nationality  ;  hence,  his  mission  was 
declined.  Because  it  was  declined,  the  rebel  Congress 


142  RESPONSIBILITY   FOR   THE    WAR. 

take  it  in  high  dudgeon,  and  pronounce  it  a  "contemptuous 
refusal."  The  contempt  consisted  in  not  at  once  virtually 
acknowledging  their  nationality.* 

Why  not  fight  it  out,  gentlemen,  as  the  question  has 
been  referred  to  the  sword  ?  Or,  if  tired  of  that,  why  seek 
to  gain  your  end  by  a  trick  of  diplomacy  ?  If  it  was  sim 
ply  Mr.  Stephens  whom  you  wished  to  intrust  with  the 
negotiation, — an  acknowledged  statesman,  of  high  char 
acter,  and  a  man  as  likely  to  be  received  by  the  Govern 
ment  as  any  other  prominent  rebel  leader, — why  not  send 
him  simply  as  Mr.  Stephens  ?  But,  plainly,  it  was  Mr. 
Stephens  as  "  Confederate  States"  Ambassador,  whom  you 
insisted  should  make  his  august  approach  to  Washington. 
You  would  thus,  if  possible,  gain  the  whole  case  by  diplo 
macy,  which  might  not  be  gained  by  the  sword  ;  and  you 
would  have  the  point  acknowledged  by  the  United  States 
Government  at  the  start,  in  order  that  negotiation  might 
begin,  or  else  you  would  pour  complaints  into  the  ears  of 
all  the  earth. 

*  Mr.  Davis's  Letter  of  "  Instructions  to  Mr.  Stephens"  is  dated  Richmond,  July  2, 
1863.  He  gives  him  also  a  "Letter  of  authority  to  the  Commander-in-Chief  of  the 
Army  and  Navy  of  the  United  States,"  and  it  is  "  signed  by  me,"  Mr.  Davis  says,  as 
"Commander-in-Chief  of  the  Confederate  Land  and  Naval  forces."  In  the  former 
document,  Mr.  Davis  says  :  "  If  objection  is  made  to  receiving  your  Letter  on  the 
ground  that  it  is  not  addressed  to  Abraham  Lincoln  as  President,  instead  of  Com 
mander-in-Chief,  &c.,  then  you  will  present  the  duplicate  Letter,  which  is  addressed 
to  him  as  President,  and  signed  by  me  as  President.  To  this  Letter,  objection  may 
be  made  on  the  ground  that  I  am  not  recognized  to  be  President  of  the  Confederacy. 
In  this  event,  you  will  decline  any  further  attempt  to  confer  on  the  subject  of  your 
mission,  as  such  conference  is  admissible  only  on  the  footing  of  perfect  equality." 
With  these  documents  in  his  pocket,  Mr.  Stephens  sailed  down  James  River,  and 
addressed  a  note  to  Rear- Admiral  Lee,  of  the  United  States  Navy,  dated,  "  Confed 
erate  States  steamer  Torpedo,  on  James  River,  July  4, 1863,"  in  which  he  says:  "I 
desire  to  proceed  directly  to  Washington  in  the  steamer  Torpedo,  commanded  by 
Lieutenant  Hunter  Davidson,  of  the  Confederate  States  Navy,  no  person  being  on 
board  but  the  Hon.  Mr.  Ould  and  myself,  and  the  boat's  officers  and  crew,"  (Signed) 
"  Alexander  H.  Stephens."  These  documents  show  the  ground  on  which  the  re 
spective  parties  were  placed  by  the  Richmond  authorities,  and  what  was  required 
to  be  conceded  by  the  United  States  Government,  antecedent  to  the  opening  of 
negotiations. 


KEBEL  OFFICIAL  MENDACITY.  143 

When  the  question  had  been  debated  for  two  whole 
years,  with  powder  and  shot  and  shell,  and  the  discussion 
was  still  going  on  in  that  manner,  truly  these  kind  gentle 
men  were  very  sensitive,  if  suck  "  contemptuous"  conduct 
could  disturb  them  seriously. 

REBEL    OFFICIAL   MENDACITY. 

But  there  is  something  more  serious  here  than  this 
rebel  charge  of  contempt.  When  these  sensitive  gentle 
men  charge  that  "  the  Federal  Government  would  not 
consent"  to  peace  "  on  any  terms"  that  they  "  could  pos 
sibly  concede,"  and  say,  "in  proof  of  this  we  refer  to  the 
repeated  rejection  of  all  terms  of  conciliation  and  com 
promise,"  the  charge  attains  a  seriousness  which  claims 
consideration.  It  is  nothing  short  of  the  most  deliberate 
and  direct  official  mendacity.  Do  they,  in  their  long  and 
labored  Address,  specify  any  "  terms  of  compromise"  to 
which,  they  say,  "  we  refer  ?"  None  whatever.  Were  there 
any  such  "  terms"  extant  to  which  they  could  "  refer  ?" 
None  whatever.  Did  their  authorities  ever,  in  any  shape, 
propose  ANY  "terms  of  conciliation  and  compromise?" 
Never,  in  a  single  instance.  Let  him  who  denies  it,  show  it. 
Much  less  is  the  Federal  Government  guilty  of  "  the  repeat 
ed  rejection"  or  even  one  "  rejection"  of  any  such  "  terms ;" 
for,  none  such  were  ever  once  made.  This  is  well  known. 

The  whole  question,  as  we  have  said,  respects  the  claim 
of  the  Federal  Government  to  the  entire  territory  of  the 
Union,  and  that  of  the  "  Confederate  Government"  to  a 
part  of  it.  The  Federal  Government  has  never  proposed 
to  "  compromise"  that  question,  and  undoubtedly  it  never 
will.  On  the  other  hand,  is  it  pretended  that  the  rebel 
authorities  have  ever  presented,  in  any  way,  even  indirect 
ly,  "  terms"  that  did  not  embody  their  claim  to  an  inde 
pendent  nationality  over  a  portion  of  the  territory  claimed 


144  RESPONSIBILITY   FOB   THE    WAR. 

by  the  Federal  Government  ?  ~No  honest  man  will  pretend 
this.  What,  then,  have  they  proposed  to  "  compromise," 
a  rejection  of  which  warrants  them  in  charging  that  the 
United  States  "  would  not  consent"  to  peace  ?  Nothing 
under  heaven.  There  has  been  no  "  compromise"  on  either 
side  offered,  touching  the  question  of  territorial  jurisdic 
tion, — the  radical  point  at  issue, — the  only  question  which 
has  broken  peace,  and  the  only  question  which  continues 
war.  We  therefore  speak  plainly,  but  truly,  when  we  say 
that  this  rebel  charge  is  nothing  short  of  an  official  and  de 
liberate  falsification  of  the  truth  ;  and  no  persons  know  it 
better  than  the  rebel  Congress  who  adopted  this  Address. 
So,  also,  on  another  point,  these  chivalric  gentlemen 
show  an  equal  disregard  of  truth,  where  the  plainest  his 
torical  facts  confront  them.  They  say  in  this  same  Address : 
"  Allusion  has  been  made  to  the  unsuccessful  efforts,  when 
separation  took  place,  to  procure  an  amicable  adjustment 
of  all  matters  in  dispute;"  and  for  this  result,  they  hold 
the  United  States  Government  responsible.  They  of  course 
allude  in  the  phrase,  "  when  separation  took  place,"  to  the 
time  and  the  "  efforts"  of  the  South  Carolina  Commission 
ers  who  corresponded  with  President  Buchanan,  and  to 
those  of  the  "  Confederate  States"  Commissioners  who  cor 
responded  with  Secretary  Seward,  both  of  which  cases  we 
have  already  noticed.  But,  so  far  from  those  Commission 
ers  proposing  to  negotiate  upon  "  all  matters  in  dispute," 
the  matter  which  one  party  regarded  as  the  whole  question 
at  issue, — the  right  of  jurisdiction,  in  the  Federal  Govern 
ment,  over  the  whole  territory  of  the  Union, — neither  set 
of  those  Commissioners  opened,  or  would  open,  at  all. 
They  did  not  regard  it,  in  any  sense,  as  an  open  question, 
but  in  every  sense  as  a  question  settled  forever  by  the  sole 
action  of  one  of  the  parties,  the  authorities  they  represented. 
When  the  Secretary  of  State  referred  thorn  to  a  National 


REBEL   OFFICIAL   MENDACITY.  145 

Convention  as  the  only  tribunal  for  negotiation  upon  that 
question  which  the  Federal  Government  regarded  as  the 
vital  one,  and  as  underlying  "  all  matters  in  dispute,"  the 
Confederate  Commissioners  replied  in  a  style  which  shows 
that  diplomacy  and  negotiation  were  at  an  end.  They  say 
to  the  Secretary,  in  their  final  note  : 

Persistently  weddea  to  those  fatal  theories  of  construction  of  the 
Federal  Constitution  always  rejected  by  the  statesmen  of  the  South,  and 
adhered  to  by  the  Administration  school,  *  *  *  you  now,  with  a 
persistence  untaught  and  uncured  by  the  ruin  which  has  been  wrought, 
refuse  to  recognize  the  great  fact  presented  to  you  of  a  complete  and 
successful  revolution;  you  close  your  eyes  to  the  existence  of  the  Govern 
ment  founded  upon  it,  and  ignore  the  high  duties  of  moderation  and 
humanity  which  attach  to  you  in  dealing  with  this  great  fact. 

It  thus  appears,  that  in  each  and  every  instance  of  at 
tempted  negotiation,  beginning  with  the  South  Carolina 
Commissioners  and  Mr.  Buchanan,  and  coming  down  to 
the  proposed  visit  of  the  Rebel  "  Vice-President,"  in  July, 
1863,  and  to  the  time  of  putting  forth  this  Address  by  the 
Rebel  Congress  in  February,  1864,  the  rebel  authorities 
have  uniformly  adhered  to  their  claim  of  nationality ;  and 
yet,  in  the  face  of  all  this,  they  pretend  to  have  repeatedly 
offered  "  terms  of  conciliation  and  compromise,"  and  di 
rectly  charge  the  Federal  Government  with  "  the  repeated 
rejection"  of  such  terms. 

In  all  the  instances  of  plain,  deliberate,  unvarnished 
falsehood,  both  official  and  unofficial,  which  have  charac 
terized  the  leaders  in  this  rebellion, — and  they  have  been 
neither  few  nor  far  between, — this  case  of  the  Rebel  Presi 
dent  and  the  Rebel  Congress  is  among  those  which  are 
noteworthy ;  first,  on  account  of  its  perfect  stark  naked 
ness,  having  not  the  least  shadow  of  a  basis  to  rest  upon ; 
and  secondly,  because  it  is  a  hypocritical  whining  to  make 
an  impression  that  they  are  the  most  peaceful  and  meek 
creatures  upon  earth. 


146  RESPONSIBILITY    FOR   THE   WAR. 

The  case  is  a  simple  one.  The  facts  show  that  the  South 
are  responsible  for  beginning  the  war,  as  they  are  respon 
sible  for  beginning  the  rebellion.  They  also  show  that 
both  parties  are  ready  for  peace,  when  their  terms  can  be 
granted ;  and  that  they  are  equally  bent  on  war,  in  the 
hope  that  their  ends  may  be  gained. 

ANOTHER  EFFORT  FOR  PEACE. NIAGARA  FALLS  CON 
FERENCE. 

We  have  already  seen  that  every  movement,  official  and 
unofficial,  on  the  part  of  the  rebels,  for  peace,  has  been 
based  on  a  dismemberment  of  the  Union,  and  the  recog 
nition  and  establishment  of  the  Southern  Confederacy  as 
a  separate  nation.  From  the  beginning  till  now,  while 
mourning  over  the  horrors  of  the  war,  and  attempting  to 
fix  the  whole  responsibility  for  its  continuance  upon  the 
Government,  the  rebel  leaders  and  their  presses  have  in- 
listed  on  this  condition  as  a  sine  qud  non  in  any  terms  of 
peace ;  and  generally,  too,  they  have  taken  a  course  which 
involved  this  condition,  as  antecedent  even  to  entering  upon 
negotiations. 

The  case  is  not  in  the  least  altered  by  the  latest  efforts 
which  have  come  to  our  knowledge.  Mr.  C.  C.  Clay,  Jr., 
formerly  in  the  United  States  Senate  from  Alabama,  and 
Professor  James  P.  Holcombe,  lately  of  the  Rebel  Con 
gress,  from  Virginia,  met  at  Niagara  Falls  with  Hon. 
Horace  Greeley,  of  New  York,  about  the  middle  of  July, 
and  held  a  consultation  about  terminating  the  war  and 
settling  conditions  of  peace.  It  was  at  first  supposed,  as 
appears  from  the  correspondence  which  has  been  widely 
published,  that  Messrs.  Clay  and  Ilolcombe  were  "duly 
accredited  from  Richmond,  as  the  bearers  of  propositions 
looking  to  the  establishment  of  peace."  That  impression 
was  in  some  way  made  upon  the  mind  of  Mr.  Greeley,  and 


ANOTHER  EFFORT  FOR  PEACE.  147 

as  he  had  been  requested  by  them  through  a  third  person 
to  obtain  for  them  a  safe-conduct  to  Washington,  he  com 
municated  their  desire  to  the  President  of  the  United 
States ;  and,  thereupon,  Mr.  Greeley  and  the  President's 
Private  Secretary  were  promptly  authorized  to  go  to  Nia 
gara  to  consult  with  them,  and  to  "  tender"  to  them  the 
President's  "safe-conduct  on  the  journey  proposed,"  pro 
vided  their  character  and  mission  were  such  as  Mr.  Greeley 
had  imagined.  It  turned  out,  however,  that  they  were 
not  authorized  by  the  Rebel  Government.  They  wholly 
disavow  any  official  character  in  which  to  conduct  negotia 
tions  "  looking  to  the  establishment  of  peace,"  but  declare 
that  they  are  "  in  the  confidential  employment  of  their 
Government,  and  are  entirely  familiar  with  its  wishes 
and  opinions  on  that  subject,"  and  think,  if  they  can  be 
allowed  to  go  to  Washington  and  to  Richmond,  that  they, 
or  other  gentlemen,  "  would  be  at  once  invested  with  the 
authority"  to  negotiate. 

Mr.  Greeley  thereupon  determined  to  "  solicit  fresh  in 
structions"  from  the  President.  He  immediately  obtains 
them;  and  the  President  announces  the  terms  on  which 
he  will  receive  and  consider  a  proposition  for  peace  "  which 
comes  by  and  with  an  authority  that  can  control  the 
armies  now  at  war  against  the  United  States."  No  terms 
had  been  intimated,  by  Messrs.  Clay  and  Holcombe,  on 
which  "their  Government"  would  make  peace,  though 
they  claimed  to  be  "familiar  with  its  wishes."  Among 
the  terms  named  by  the  President  as  a  basis  for  negotia 
tions,  is  that  which  has  always  lain  at  the  bottom  of  the 
strife,  and  to  maintain  which  the  Government  has  been  at 
war  from  the  first,  viz.:  "the  integrity  of  the  whole 
Union."  This  has  always  been  deemed  the  great  and  un 
alterable  condition, — the  maintenance  of  our  nationality. 

At  this  point,  this  conference  on  the  part  of  the  "  con- 


148  RESPONSIBILITY   FOR   THE   WAR. 

fidential"  employes  of  the  Rebel  Government  breaks 
down.  Jefferson  Davis  "  controls  the  armies  now  at  war 
against  the  United  States,"  as  the  head  of  that  "  Govern 
ment"  with  whose  "  wrishes  and  opinions"  on  peace  they 
"  are  entirely  familiar."  Knowing  that  "  their  Govern 
ment"  is  unalterably  determined  on  maintaining  indepen 
dence  against  "  the  integrity  of  the  whole  Union,"  they 
declare  that  their  rulers  "have  no  right  to  barter  away 
their  priceless  heritage  of  self-government"  They  also 
say  for  their  people  at  large :  "  While  an  ardent  desire 
for  peace  pervades  the  people  of  the  Confederate  States, 
we  rejoic'3  to  believe  that  there  are  few,  if  any  among 
them,  who  would  purchase  it  at  the  expense  of  liberty, 
honor,  and  self-respect.  If  it  can  be  secured  only  by  their 
submission  to  terms  of  conquest,  the  generation  is  yet  un 
born  which  will  witness  its  restitution."  And  so  the  affair 
terminates. 

It  thus  appears  from  this  last  semi-official  effort,  con 
ducted  by  these  "  confidential"  gentlemen,  that  the  rebel 
authorities  and  people,  although  anxious  for  peace,  and 
anxious  to  throw  the  whole  responsibility  of  continuing 
the  war  upon  our  Government  and  people,  still  insist,  as 
the  only  possible  basis  for  peace,  on  a  total  dismember 
ment  of  the  Union,  and  a  complete  establishment  of  the 
Southern  Confederacy  as  a  separate  nation. 

MISSION   TO   RICHMOND. PEACE   AGAIN. 

About  the  time  that  the  Niagara  Falls  conference  was 
in  progress,  a  mission  was  undertaken  by  two  gentlemen 
to  the  rebel  capital,  which  has  generally  been  understood 
to  have  some  connection  with  movements  for  peace ;  or, 
at  least,  to  ascertain,  if  possible,  the  temper  of  the  Rich 
mond  authorities  on  that  subject. 

Whatever  its  object  may  have  been,  it  is  known  that 


MISSION   TO    RICHM010>. — PEACE   AGAIN.  149 

Colonel  Jaques,  commanding  an  Illinois  regiment  in  the 
Federal  army,  and  Mr".  James  R.  Gilmore,  of  Boston,  made 
a  visit  to  Richmond  in  July,  and  after  having  intercourse 
with  the  Rebel  President  and  other  officials,  returned 
within  the  Union  lines.  Their  mission  was  authorized  or 
permitted  by  the  Government  at  Washington,  and  they 
w^ere  passed  through  the  lines  of  the  army  by  General 
Grant.  They  were  kindly  and  hospitably  received,  as 
they  report,  during  their  brief  stay  in  Richmond,  and  had 
an  opportunity  to  gain  valuable  informatkm. 

All  that  bears  upon  our  immediate  subject,  so  far  as  the 
object  of  this  mission  has  been  made  public,  is  found  in  a 
letter  of  Mr.  Gilmore,  under  date  of  July  22,  1864.  Re 
ferring  to  the  Niagara  Falls  conference,  between  Messrs. 
Greeley,  Clay,  and  Holcombe,  he  says : 

It  will  result  in  nothing.  Jefferson  Davis  said  to  me  last  Sunday, — 
and,  with  all  his  faults,  I  believe  him  a  man  of  truth, — "This  war  must 
go  on  till  the  last  of  this  generation  falls  in  his  tracks,  and  his  children 
seize  his  musket  and  fight  our  battle,  unless  you  acknowledge  our  right  to 
self-government.  We  are  not  fighting  for  slavery.  We  are  fighting  for 
Independence,  and  that,  or  extermination,  we  will  have." 

This  statement  shows,  that  the  position  taken  by  Mr. 
Davis  as  late  as  Sunday,  the  17th  of  July,  is  precisely  the 
same  in  terms,  upon  peace,  as  that  declared  by  Messrs. 
Clay  and  Holcombe,  in  their  final  note  to  Mr.  Greeley,  un 
der  date  at  Niagara  of  July  21st.  The  great  point  which 
divides  the  parties  is  the  same  now  as  in  the  beginning, 
and.  is  that  which  led  to  the  war ;  the  rebels  determined 
on  dividing  the  Union,  destroying  our  nationality,  and 
claiming  "self-government  and  independence;"  and  our 
Government  determined  on  maintaining  our  nationality 
and  preserving  "  the  integrity  of  the  whole  Union." 

Whatever  Mr.  Davis, — who  is  indorsed  by  Mr.  Gilmore 
as  "a  man  of  truth," — may  find  it  convenient  to  say  at  this 


150  RESPONSIBILITY   FOB   THE    WAR. 

late  period,  for  private  or  public  effect,  for  domestic  or 
trans- Atlantic  consumption,  about  their  "not  fighting  for 
slavery,"  the  world  well  knows, — the  proof  comes  from 
the  rebels  themselves,  and  we  have  given  it  in  full, — that 
"  slavery"  was  the  prompting  cause  which  led  them  first 
to  "  secede"  for  "  independence,"  and  then  to  "  fight"  in 
order  to  establish  it. 

Our  main  purpose,  however,  in  referring  to  these  late 
movements  upon  peace,  is  to  hold  up  the  fact  that  it  is 
our  nationality  which  is  at  stake  in  the  war;  that  the 
rebels  will  not  make  "  peace,"  though  they  may  constantly 
clamor  for  it,  except  on  the  condition  of  a  total  destruction 
of  the  Union.  This  is  their  ultimatum,  and  it  has  been 
their  position  from  the  first.  We  are  free  to  say,  that  as 
to  maintain  "  the  integrity  of  the  whole  Union"  was  the 
position  taken  by  our  Government  and  people  from  the 
first,  we  hope  this  position  will  be  held  to  the  end.  If  on 
that  issue  the  rebels,  in  the  words  of  their  President, 
court  "  extermination,"  then  let  them  be  exterminated. 

We  have  said,  as  simply  indicating  our  opinion,  that  we 
believed  there  would  be  no  peace  till  it  was  conquered  by  a 
destruction  of  the  rebel  armies,  and  resulted  in  the  com 
plete  triumph  of  the  Government  and  the  re-establishment 
of  the  national  authority  over  every  foot  of  the  Union. 
This  has  been  our  conviction  from  the  first,  and  it  is  our 
conviction  still.  And  yet,  we  have  many  times  seen  it 
illustrated  since  the  war  began,  that  it  is  safest  not  to  pro 
phesy.  It  is  possible  that  the  leading  conspirators  may 
be  willing  to  submit  to  the  Government  before  their  mili 
tary  power  is  totally  overthrown,  but  we  doubt  it ;  and  it 
is  among  the  possible  eventualities  which  may  occur,  as 
the  result  of  the  pending  Presidential  canvass,  that  the 
people  may  be  willing,  in  order  to  spare  the  effusion  of 


MISSION   TO   RICHMOND. PEACE    AGAIN.  151 

blood,  to  submit  to  a  settlement  on  the  basis  of  a  recogni 
tion  of  the  Rebel  Confederacy ;  but  we  have  much  mis 
taken  what  we  believe  to  be  their  fixed  purpose  if  this 
shall  be  finally  achieved.  We  shall  therefore  adhere  to 
our  earliest  and  present  opinions,  until  the  event  shall 
prove  them  erroneous. 


I 
152         KESPONSIBILITT   OF   THE   SOUTHERN   CI1UKCH. 


CHAPTER  V. 

RESPONSIBILITY    OF    THE    SOUTHERN    CHURCH    FOR    THE 
REBELLION  AND   THE   WAR. 

IN  charging  the  full  responsibility  for  the  rebellion  upon 
the  South,  we  must  go  back  of  the  public  actors  on  the 
political  arena  to  find  a  proper  lodgment  for  a  large  share 
of  it. 

Immediately  upon  the  result  of  the  Presidential  election 
of  1860  being  made  known  by  the  electric  flash,  the  trea 
sonable  work  began. 

Upon  the  sixth  of  Norember  (the  day  of  the  election)  [says  Dr. 
Palmer,  speaking  of  the  people  of  the  seceded  States  generally],  these 
masses  went  to  bed  as  firmly  attached  to  the  Union  as  they  had  ever 
been,  and  awoke  on  the  seventh,  after  Mr.  Lincoln's  election,  just  as 
determined  upon  resistance  to  his  rule.  The  revolution  in  public  opin 
ion  was  far  too  sudden,  too  universal,  and  too  radical,  to  be  occasioned 
by  the  craft  and  jugglery  of  politicians.  It  was  not  their  wire-dancing 
upon  party  platforms  which  thus  instantaneously  broke  up  the  deep 
foundations  of  the  popular  will,  and  produced  this  spontaneous  uprising 
of  the  people  in  the  majesty  of  their  supremacy ;  casting  party  hacks 
aside,  who  shall  have  no  control  over  a  movement  not  having  its  genesis 
in  their  machinations. 

The  substantial  truthfulness,  in  good  part,  of  what  is 
here  related,  suggests  the  most  painful  and  humiliating 
feature  which  the  three  years'  progress  of  the  rebellion 
exhibits.  The  above  was  published  in  April,  1861,  in  the 
Southern  Presbyterian  Review,  of  Columbia,  South  Caro 
lina,  before  the  attack  upon  Fort  Sumter.  At  that  time 
the  secession  of  seven  States  had  occurred.  As  stated  in  a 
former  chapter,  it  is  well  known  that  a  majority  of  the 


RESPONSIBILITY    OF   THE    SOUTHERN    CHURCH.          153 

people  in  nearly  every  one  of  the  seceded  States  was  at 
first  against  secession  ;  that  in  fact  many  of  the  States  were 
carried  out  by  violence,  and  in  direct  opposition  to  the  will 
of  the  people ;  and  that,  as  regards  the  most  of  them,  their 
ordinances  of  secession  were  not  submitted  to  a  popular 
vote.  Dr.  Palmer's  language  is  therefore  altogether  too 
sweeping,  as  to  the  suddenness  and  universality  of  the 
change  in  the  popular  sentiment  of  even  the  seven  States 
to  which  he  refers.  It  did  not  become  "universal"  and 
"  radical"  for  secession  till  long  afterwards,  even  if  there 
has  not  always  been,  as  indeed  facts  assure  us,  a  strong 
Union  element  in  the  seceded  States.  Writing  in  the 
spring  of  1861,  he  gives  the  impressions  which  things  then 
occurring  about  him  made  upon  his  enthusiastic  nature, 
rather  than  the  facts  as  they  existed  immediately  after  the 
Presidential  election. 

The  Gulf  States  had  then  seceded ;  the  Provisional  Gov 
ernment  at  Montgomery  had  been  inaugurated ;  the  bat 
teries  of  his  own  native  Carolina  were  thickly  gathering 
around  beleagured  Sumter  ;  their  opening  upon  the  devoted 
fortress  was  anxiously  awaited,  to  bring  the  Old  Dominion 
and  other  States  into  the  ranks  of  treason ;  and  already 
Southern  orators  were  painting  the  visions  of  coming  glory 
which  would  soon  burst  in  full-orbed  splendor  upon  the 
great  Slave  Empire  of  the  Gulf.  The  eloquent  divine  was 
too  much  dazzled  by  that  bewildering  present  and  its  glow 
ing  future  to  be  a  safe  chronicler  of  the  events  of  even  the 
then  recent  past. 

But  admitting  substantially  what  he  declares  on  this 
point  (only  with  abatement  as  to  time),  and  freely  con 
ceding  that  "  the  revolution  in  public  opinion"  was  by  no 
means  "  occasioned  by  the  craft  and  jugglery  of  politicians," 
we  are  then  led  to  inquire,  what  mysterious  and  potent 
agency  it  was  which  "  broke  up  the  deep  foundations  of 


154         RESPONSIBILITY    OF   THE    SOUTHERN   CHURCH. 

the  popular  will,"  and  which,  if  it  did  not  assume,  by 
"casting  party  hacks  aside,"  absolute  control  over  a 
movement  not  having  "  its  genesis  in  their  machinations," 
did  at  least  furnish  the  intellectual  and  moral  pabulum 
upon  which  the  popular  appetite  was  feasted,  and  the 
popular  strength  nerved  for  the  dark  deeds  which  were 
before  it?  We  would  know  who  is  to  be  held  chiefly 
responsible,  when  we  are  told  that  "  the  deep  foundations 
of  the  popular  will"  were  broken  up  in  a  single  night,  and 
that  the  great  popular  heart,  hitherto  "  firmly  attached  to 
the  Union,"  was  so  suddenly,  by  a  "  spontaneous  uprising 
of  the  people  in  the  majesty  of  their  supremacy,"  brought 
to  abjure  the  Union,  and  to  love  all  that  was  treacherous 
and  perjured  and  vile ! 

There  must  have  been  some  powerful  cause  for  this,  of 
which  he  does  not  inform  us.  The  people  never  act  with 
out  leaders,  in  a  revolution  or  in  any  other  great  move 
ment.  We  have  no  difficulty  in  finding  the  secret  which 
perhaps  Dr.  Palmer's  modesty  would  withhold.  His  own 
teachings,  in  good  part,  and  the  teachings  of  others  of  his 
own  profession,  furnish  the  mournful  answer  to  these 
astounding  questions. 

The  real  truth  of  the  case  deliberately  and  solemnly 
holds  the  Southern  Church  and  the  Southern  ministry, — or 
the  Southern  ministry,  with  a  few  influential  laymen,  lead 
ing  the  Southern  Church,  and  they  together  leading  the 
more  influential  portion  of  the  Southern  millions, — to  a 
vastly  higher  responsibility  for  the  inception,  advocacy, 
progress,  and  the  consequences  resulting,  of  this  treason 
and  rebellion,  than  any  other  class  among  the  Southern 
people ;  and,  in  asserting  this,  we  but  agree  with  Southern 
statesmen,  whose  testimony,  to  be  given  in  due  time,  cor 
roborates  what  the  palpable  facts  so  fully  and  lamentably 
declare. 


REV.    J.    H.    THORNWELL    AIDS    THE    REBELLION.         155 


EARLY   AGENCY    OF   LEADING  DIVINES. 

To  substantiate  this  grave  indictment,  it  is  only  neces 
sary  to  notice  events  in  the  order  of  their  occurrence,  at 
the  beginning  of  the  rebellion  and  for  the  few  months 
which  immediately  succeeded.  The  Presidential  election 
occurred  on  the  sixth  of  November,  1860,  and  the  ferment 
in  South  Carolina  commenced  immediately  after,  and  soon 
spread  into  other  States.  The  State  authorities  of  South 
Carolina, — who,  we  presume,  are  included  by  Dr.  Palmer 
among  those  that  on  the  sixth  of  November  "  went  to  bed 
as  firmly  attached  to  the  Union  as  they  had  ever  been  (for 
thirty  years  at  least),  and  awoke  on  the  seventh,  after  Mr. 
Lincoln's  election,  just  as  determined  upon  resistance  to 
his  rule," — were  not  at  least  then  so  taken  up  with  "  their 
wire-dancing  upon  party  platforms,"  that  they  could  not 
think  upon  their  schemes  with  what  we  must  charitably 
suppose  was  some  little  serious  concern ;  and  so  they  ap 
pointed  a  State  Fast  for  the  twenty-first  of  November, 
just  fifteen  days  after  the  election.  We  have  the  sermon 
which  was  preached  on  that  day  by  Dr.  Thornwell,  at 
Columbia,  the  State  capital. 

REV.    JAMES    II.    THORNWELL,  D.  D.,    AIDS    THE    REBELLION. 

All  who  have  known  the  preacher,  and  the  reputation 
he  had,  know  that  he  was  a  man  of  master  mind  and  com 
manding  influence.  He  combined  logical  acuteness, 
strength  in  argument,  perspicuity  of  style,  and  oratorical 
power,  as  they  are  found  in  but  very  few  men.  He  was 
idolized  and  honored  both  in  and  out  of  the  Church,  in  his 
native  State  and  elsewhere,  for  his  great  natural  abilities, 
profound  attainments,  and  ripe  scholarship.  We  cannot 
detract  from  his  fair  fame  in  any  of  these  respects,  nor 
have  we  the  least  disposition  to  do  so.  He  was  in  all 


156         RESPONSIBILITY    OF   THE    SOUTHERN    CHURCH. 

respects  a  very  eminent  man.  In  the  South  he  was  called 
"the  Calhoun  of  the  Church."  He  had  been  President  of 
the  State  College  at  Columbia,  had  often  preached  before 
the  South  Carolina  Legislature,  at  their  request,  and  was, 
at  the  time  the  rebellion  began,  a  Professor  in  the  Theo 
logical  Seminary  of  the  Presbyterian  Church  at  Columbia. 

As  his  work  is  done  on  earth,  and  he  has  departed  this 
life,  we  cannot  say  any  thing  disparaging  to  his  memory, 
further  than  a  condemnation  of  his  sentiments  and  great 
influence,  as  giving  early  and  efficient  aid  to  a  most  wicked 
rebellion,  may  be  construed  as  doing  so.  We  know  of  no 
principle  in  ethics,  however,  which  would  justly  condemn 
a  candid  examination  at  the  present  time  of  what  he  wrote 
and  published,  and  the  holding  of  the  influence  which  he 
exerted  in  favor  of  the  rebellion  to  its  just  measure  of  re 
sponsibility,  which  would  not  also  condemn  the  animad 
version  of  the  historian  a  hundred  years  hence.  In  what 
we  say,  therefore,  here  and  elsewhere,  we  shall  exhibit  no 
squeamishness  in  dealing  with  his  views.  We  admired 
him  when  living,  and  for  the  same  qualities  we  admire 
him  now,  dead;  and  simply  of  the  man  we  can  sincerely 
say,  Requiescat  in  pace.  But  his  published  sentiments 
upon  the  rebellion,  as  upon  every  other  subject,  are  the 
property  of  the  public. 

This  sermon  of  Dr.  Thorriwell,  preached  so  soon  after 
the  Presidential  election,  and  only  wanting  a  day  of  one 
full  month  before  the  secession  of  the  Stale  of  South  Caro 
lina  and  the  assembling  of  her  Convention,  enters  into  and 
urges  the  whole  doctrine  of  secession  on  the  ground  of 
Constitutional  right,  the  alleged  encroachment  upon 
slavery  being  given  as  the  justifying  cause.  We  need  not 
say  that  this  work  was  done  with  ability.  It  could  not 
be  done  otherwise,  when  the  preacher  attempted  to  layout 
his  strength.  We  give  only  a  sentence  or  two  from  this 


157 

discourse,  the  object  being  simply  to  show  his  position 
rather  than  his  argument,  as  our  only  aim  here  is  to  pre 
sent  the  simple  fact  of  responsibility,  as  seen  in  the  order 
of  time.  An  article  published  soon  after,  to  which  we 
shall  subsequently  refer,  presents  his  argument  for  seces 
sion  more  fully,  justifying  it  on  the  same  ground  here 
assumed,  the  alleged  encroachments  upon  slavery. 

HIS    FAST-DAY    DISCOURSE,    NOV.     21,     1860. 

In  his  sermon  he  says : 

The  Union  which  our  fathers  designed  to  be  perpetual,  is  on  the 
verge  of  dissolution.  A  name  once  dear  to  our  hearts,  has  become  in 
tolerable  to  entire  States.  Once  admired,  loved,  almost  adored,  as  the 
citadel  and  safeguard  of  freedom,  it  has  become,  in  many  minds,  synony 
mous  with  oppression,  with  treachery,  with  falsehood,  and  with  vio 
lence.  The  Government  to  which  we  once  invited  the  victims  of 
tyranny  from  every  part  of  the  world,  and  under  whose  ample  shield 
we  gloried  in  promising  them  security  and  protection — that  Government 
has  become  hateful  in  the  very  regions  in  which  it  was  once  hailed 
with  the  greatest  loyalty. 

The  cause  of  this  feeling  in  the  South  is  thus  stated : 

There  is  one  subject,  however,  in  relation  to  which  the  non-slavehold- 
ing  States  have  not  only  broken  faith,  but  have  justified  their  course 
upon  the  plea  of  conscience.  We  allude  to  the  subject  of  slavery.  They 
have  been  reluctant  to  open  the  Territories  to  the  introduction  of  slaves, 
aud  have  refused  to  restore  fugitives  to  their  masters.  *  *  *  I  shall 
restrict  myself  to  our  dealings  with  the  institution  which  has  produced 
the  present  convulsions  of  the  country,  and  brought  us  to  the  verge  of 
ruin.  [And  near  the  close  he  warns  his  hearers,  that,  for  the  sake  of 
"the  institution,"  they  may  have  to  meet  the  horrors  of  war  and  car 
nage — prophetic,  and  awfully  true:]  Even  though  our  cause  be  just, 
and  our  course  approved  of  Heaven,  our  path  to  victory  may  be  through 
a  baptism  of  blood.  Liberty  has  its  martyrs  and  confessors,  as  well  as 
religion.  The  oak  is  rooted  amid  wintry  storms.  *  *  *  Our  State 
may  suffer;  she  may  suffer  grievously ;  she  may  suffer  long.  Be  it  so: 
we  shall  love  her  all  the  more  tenderly  and  the  more  intensely,  the 
more  bitterly  she  suffers. 


158          RESPONSIBILITY    OF    THE    SOUTHERN    CHURCH. 

The  foregoing  sentences,  to  which  many  in  a  similar 
strain  might  be  added,  show  the  key-note  thus  early 
struck.  How  eloquent  and  earnest  men  become, — and  the 
ministers  of  religion,  too, — when  pleading  for  "slavery" 
in  the  name  of  "liberty,"  and  braving  all  the  miseries  of 
war  for  its  sake!* 

HE   VINDICATES   THE    SECESSION    OF   SOUTH    CAROLINA. 

South  Carolina  seceded  on  the  20th  of  December,  1860. 
Immediately  after,  Dr.  Thornwell  wrote  his  elaborate 
vindication  of  the  act,  reviewing  the  "  Ordinance"  and 
"Declaration  of  the  Immediate  Causes,"  &c.,  put  forth  by 
the  Convention.  It  was  published  in  the  Southern  Pres 
byterian  (Quarterly)  Review,  for  January,  1861.  It  was 
regarded  by  Southern  statesmen  as  by  far  the  ablest  paper 
written  on  the  subject,  and  several  editions  were  published 
and  sown  broadcast  over  the  South.  In  this  article  he 
says: 

*  An  event  showing  Dr.  Thornwell's  animus  about  secession,  occurred  still 
earlier.  The  Presidential  electors  in  South  Carolina  are  chosen  by  the  Legislature 
instead  of  by  the  people.  The  Legislature  met  on  the  day  of  election  (Nov.  6th, 
1860)  to  choose  electors.  Dr.  Thornwell  opened  the  session  with  prayer.  We  have 
this  prayer,  at  length,  as  taken  at  the  time  from  a  Southern  paper.  In  the  midst  of 
much  that  is  excellent,  these  sentences  are  found,  which,  considering  the  time, 
occasion,  and  circumstances,  are  significant  of  what  soon  after  became  open  treason 
and  rebellion  :  "  0  God!  the  destiny  of  this  country  may  turn  upon  the  events  of  a 
few  short  hours."  "  Give  wisdom  to  all  our  assemblies ;  give  the  spirit  of  a  sound 
mind  to  the  members  of  this  Confederacy,  and  grant  that  Thy  name  may  be  glorified. 
If  it  be  Thy  will  that  a  different  destiny  awaits  us,  we  ask  Thy  blessing  upon  our 
Commonwealth."  "  We  beseech  that  Thy  favor  may  rest  upon  all  those  States  that 
have  a  common  interest  with  us.  We  beseech  Thee  that  they  may  be  bound  to 
gether  in  the  holy  ties  of  truth,  justice,  and  love.  Give  us,  we  beseech  Thee,  an 
honorable  name  among  the  nations  of  the  earth."  Dr.  Thornwell  avowed  himself 
for  rebellion  even  earlier  than  election  day,  by  at  least  some  six  months.  When 
the  General  Assembly  of  the  Presbyterian  Church  was  sitting  in  Rochester,  New 
York,  in  May,  the  news  of  Mr.  Lincoln's  nomination  at  Chicago,  just  then  made, 
became  a  topic  of  conversation.  Dr.  Thornwell  declared  that  if  either  Mr.  Lincoln 
or  Mr.  Douglas  were  elected,  the  Southern  States  would  inevitably  secede ;  that 
neither  was  acceptable  to  the  South  ;  that  secession  was  a  foregone  conclusion ;  and 
that  the  South  would  not  and  ought  not  to  acquiesce  in  the  election  of  either. 


OPEN    RESISTANCE    COUNSELLED.  159 

South  Carolina  has  now.  become  a  separate  and  independent  State. 
She  takes  her  place  as  an  equal  among  the  other  nations  of  the  earth. 
This  is  certainly  one  of  the  most  grave  and  important  events  of  modern 
times.  It  involves  the  destiny  of  a  continent,  and,  through  that  conti 
nent,  the  fortunes  of  the  human  race. 

This  fixes  the  writer's  own  estimate  of  the  responsibility 
which  he  and  his  fellow-clergymen  assumed  in  taking  the 
lead  in  a  matter  so  momentous. 

He  then  proposes  to  declare  "  the  causes  which  have 
brought  about  this  astounding  result;"  declares,  "that 
there  was  a  cause,  and  an  adequate  cause,  might  be  pre 
sumed  from  the  character  of  the  Convention  which  passed 
the  ordinance  of  secession,  and  the  perfect  unanimity  with 
which  it  was  done;"  that  "it  embraced  the  wisdom, 
moderation,  and  integrity  of  the  bench,  the  learning  and 
prudence  of  the  bar,  and  the  eloquence  and  piety  of  the 
pulpit  /"  and  then  says,  showing  the  cause  to  be  what  we 
have  before  stated,  that  it  was  "  the  universal  sentiment 
of  all,  that  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States  has  been 
virtually  repealed,  and  that  every  slaveholding  State  has 
just  ground  for  secession"  He  then,  in  view  of  the  fact 
assumed,  "  that  the  Constitution,  in  its  relations  to  slavery, 
has  been  virtually  repealed,"  says :  "  If  this  point  can  be 
made  out,  secession  becomes  not  only  a  right,  but  a  bounden 
duty."  Such  is  the  burden  of  the  argument  which  per 
vades  the  entire  article. 

OPEN    RESISTANCE    COUNSELLED. 

The  following  sentences  will  show  still  further,  from 
the  same  article,  how  open  resistance  to  the  Government 
was  urg-ed  at  this  early  period  by  this  stanch  Churchman, 
and  the  responsibility  which  he,  as  an  influential  leader  of 
God's  people,  thus  voluntarily  assumed  : 

Now,  we  say  that  this  state  of  things  is  not  to  be  borne.  A  free  people 
can  never  consent  to  their  own  degradation.  *  *  *  If,  therefore, 


160         RESPONSIBILITY    OF    THE    SOUTHERN    CHURCH. 

the  South  is  not  prepared  to  see  her  institutions  surrounded  by  enemies, 
and  wither  and  decay  under  these  hostile  influences ;  if  she  means  to 
cherish  and  protect  them,  it  is  her  boundcn  duty  to  resist  the  revolution 
which  threatens  them  with  ruin.  The  triumph  of  the  principles  which 
Mr.  Lincoln  is  pledged  to  carry  out,  is  the  death-knell  of  slavery.* 

More  exhortations  to  open  resistance  are  found  in  this 
article : 

If  the  South  could  be  induced  to  submit  to  Lincoln,  the  time,  we  con 
fidently  predict,  will  come  when  all  grounds  of  controversy  will  be 
removed  in  relation  to  fugitive  slaves,  by  expunging  the  provision  under 
which  they  are  claimed.  The  principle  is  at  work  and  enthroned  in 
power,  whose  inevitable  tendency  is  to  secure  this  result.  Let  us  crush 
the  serpent  in  the  egg.  *  *  *  •  We  know  it  to  be  the  fixed  determina 
tion  of  them  all  (the  slaveholding  States),  not  to  acquiesce  in  the  prin 
ciples  which  have  brought  Mr.  Lincoln  into  power.  *  *  *  The  evil 
day  may  be  put  off,  but  it  must  come.  The  country  must  be  divided  into 
two  peopk,  and  the  point  which  we  wish  now  to  press  upon  the  whole 
South,  is  the  importance  of  preparing  at  once  for  this  consummation. 
*  *  *  Conquered  we  never  can  be.  *  *  *  To  save  the  Union  is 
impossible.  *  *  *  We  prefer  peace — but  if  war  must  come,  we  are 
prepared  to  meet  it  with  unshaken  confidence  in  the  God  of  battles. 

CHARGE    OF   TREASON   ESTABLISHED. 

The  foregoing  is  sufficient  to  show  the  influence  which 
the  powerful  pen  of  Dr.  Thornwell  gave  to  secession,  when 
it  was  yet  in  its  embryo  state,  with  the  exception  of  South 
Carolina.  If  these  utterances  are  not, — morally  and  be 
fore  God,  and  by  the  Constitution  and  laws, — instinct  with 
treason,  then  it  is  difficult  to  define  the  term.  The  Con 
stitution  of  the  United  States  ("to  which,"  even  Dr.  Thorn- 
well  admits,  "these  States  swore  allegiance")  says: 

*  We  have  shown  in  previous  pages,  by  documentary  proof,  that  so  for  from  Mr. 
Lincoln  having  been  "pledged  to  carry  out"  any  "principles"  which  would  interfere 
with  the  rights  of  the  States  over  slavery,  he  was  "pledged"  to  do  just  the  contrary; 
by  all  the  speeches  he  made  and  letters  he  wrote  when  a  candidate,  by  the  platform 
of  the  party  that  nominated  him,  by  his  letter  of  acceptance,  by  his  Inaugural 
Address,  and  by  all  else  he  said  and  did. 


DRS.    THORNWELL,    LELAND,    AND    ADGER.  161 

"Treason  against  the  United  States  shall  consist  only  in 
levying  war  against  them,  or  in  adhering  to  their  enemies, 
giving  them  aid  and  comfort."  Dr.  Thornwell's  writings 
and  speeches  show  an  adherence  to  the  "  enemies''  of  the 
Government,  and  were  a  powerful  incitement  to  the  "  war" 
now  raging;  were  so  used,  and  thus  gave  the  most  sub 
stantial  "  aid  and  comfort"  to  rebels  in  arms, — that  of 
moral  countenance  and  earnest  support,  the  most  essential 
element  of  success,  and  without  which  powder  and  lead 
and  all  other  *'  aid"  are  worthless. 

But  how  civil  tribunals  would  regard  such  a  case,  is  not 
with  us  the  chief  question.  By  the  doctrines  of  religion, 
and  before  the  bar  of  God,  he  was  guilty  of  one  of  the 
highest  crimes  against  the  State, — God's  o\vn  ordinance, — 
winch  any  man  can  commit.  That  he  was  sincere,  we  do 
not  doubt,  but  that  does  not  relieve  his  criminality.  He 
was  a  minister  of  the  Gospel,  of  the  highest  ability  and  in 
fluence.  He  is  largely  responsible  for  bringing  the  Church, 
— one  of  the  most  powerful  elements  of  society, — to  "  aid" 
in  the  horrid  work  of  treason,  rebellion,  and  war. 

DRS.    THORNWELL,    LELAND,    AND    ADGER,  UPON    THE  STUMP. 

In  addition  to  the  power  of  his  pen,  Dr.  Thorn  well  gave 
his  eloquent  voice  to  the  cause  of  treason,  at  a  meeting 
held  at  the  capital  of  South  Carolina,  to  ratify  her  seces 
sion. 

In  the  North  Carolina  Presbyterian,  of  January  5, 
1861,  is  found  a  letter  from  "  a  student  of  Columbia  Semi 
nary,"  detailing  the  proceedings  of  "the  great  ratification 
meeting,"  held  at  Columbia,  "  which  was  called  to  indorse 
the  action  of  the  Convention."  He  says:  "Many  of  the 
clergy  were  called  on  to  express  their  views  in  regard  to 
this  important  matter.  Rev.  Drs.  Tiiornwell,  Leland, 
Adger  (all  Professors  in  the  Theological  Seminary),  and 


162         RESPONSIBILITY    OF    THE    SOUTHERN    CHURCH. 

Reynolds,  and  Rev.  Messrs.  Mullaly  and  Brecker,  addressed 
the  meeting."  This  shows  how  early,  and  how  exten 
sively,  the  clergy  of  the  South  became  the  open  advocates 
of  treason  and  rebellion.  The  writer  then  gives  an  ac 
count  chiefly  of  Dr.  Thorn  well's  speech,  as  follows  : 

Dr.  Thormvell  spoke  at  some  length.  He  said  that  he  had  foreseen, 
and  some  time  ago  predicted,  the  course  which  our  affairs  would  take, 
in  case  that  Lincoln,  or  any  other  man  with  his  avowed  principles,  was 
elected  President.  As  to  the  right  of  secession,  he  said  that  he  held 
that  the  election  of  Lincoln  is  equivalent  to  presenting  a  new  Constitution 
to  the  States,  and  asking  them  to  subscribe  to  it.  Secession  is  only  re 
fusing  to  abolish  the  old  and  adopt  the  new  Constitution  now  presented 
to  us  by  the  Black  Republican  party.  The  avowed  principles  of  this 
party  are  not  constitutional,  and  its  success  in  electing  the  President  of 
the  United  States  upon  principles  which,  if  carried  into  effect,  will  sub 
vert  the  National  Constitution,  and  trample  it  under  foot,  and  set  up  a 
sectional  one  in  its  stead,  is  equivalent  to  putting  the  question  to  the 
States,  Will  you  submit  to  this  new  Constitution  or  not  ?  Secession  is 
the  refusal  to  submit,  and  is  therefore  not  unconstitutional.  The  Con 
stitution  to  which  these  States  swore  allegiance  has  been  wrested  from 
us,  and  something  else,  gotten  up  by  a  sectional  party,  is  presented  to  us 
in  its  stead.  He  advised  that  the  State  act  with  calmness,  caution,  and 
decision,  and  so  demean  herself  towards  her  sister  Southern  States,  as 
to  secure,  if  possible,  their  co-operation  with  us.  He  believed  that  all 
our  sister  Southern  States  would  co-operate  with  us,  and  that  we  would 
be  permitted  to  withdraw  peaceably  from  the  United  States.  He  hoped 
to  see  two  Republics  standing  side  by  side,  and  becoming  all  the  greater, 
by  the  honest  rivalry  that  would  exist  between  them.  Rashness  and 
temerity  on  our  part  would  repel  our  sister  States  from  us,  which  are 
one  with  us, — one  in  race,  one  in  institutions,  one  in  interest,  and  we 
believe  that  they  should  be  one  in  a  separate,  Southern  Confederacy. 
All  the  other  speeches  were  of  a  similar  tone,  and  breathed  the  same 
spirit.  I  think  I  can  safely  say,  that  this  report  expresses  the  senti 
ment  of  the  people  of  this  State. 

Dr.  Thornwell  admits  that  "  the  States  swore  allegiance 
to  the  Constitution;"  then  they  violated  that  "allegiance" 
by  secession. 


DR.    PALMER    AND    SENATOR   TOOMBS.  163 

EARLY   AID    OF   REV.    B.    M.    PALMER,    D.    D. 

The  influence  of  Dr.  Palmer  was  publicly  given  in  favoi 
of  secession  only  eight  days  after  Dr.  Thorn  well's  Fast-Day 
discourse  was  preached.  On  the  day  of  the  State  Thanks 
giving  in  Louisiana,  the  29th  of  November,  1860,  he 
preached  in  New  Orleans  a  discourse  (before  quoted),  iE 
which  he  vehemently  urged  secession,  justifying  it  on  the 
same  ground  taken  by  Dr.  Thornwell,  the  apprehensions  oi 
governmental  interference  with  slavery. 

DR.    PALMER    AND    THE    MISSION    OF    SENATOR   TOOMBS. 

We  have  heard  related  an  occurrence  of  singular  signifi 
cance  connected  with  this  Thanksgiving  service.  We 
cannot  personally  vouch  for  its  truth,  but  its  authority  is 
said  to  be  the  Hon.  Miles  Taylor,  a  member  of  the  United 
States  House  of  Representatives  of  the  Congress  of 
1860-61,  and  among  the  last  of  the  Union  members  from 
Louisiana  to  give  up  his  seat  after  the  secession  of  that 
State.  The  case  strongly  illustrates  the  estimate  which 
Southern  statesmen  had  of  the  ability  of  the  Church  to  aid 
the  rebellion,  the  necessity  they  felt  of  enlisting  the  Chris 
tian  portion  of  the  community  in  leading  the  way,  and  the 
ready  compliance  of  an  eloquent  divine  with  their  wishes. 

It  is  well  known  that  a  strong  Union  sentiment  existed 
in  Louisiana,  and  especially  in  New  Orleans,  long  after 
secession  had  carried  over  other  States,  and  that  the 
vote  of  the  people  of  Louisiana,  when  it  was  finally  taken, 
was  actually  against  secession,  and  was  never  officially 
declared.  So  important  was  it  deemed  to  have  New 
Orleans  move  in  the  matter  early,  that  Mr.  Robert  Toombs, 
of  Georgia,  still  holding  his  seat  in  the  LTnited  States 
Senate,  and  occupying  it  long  afterwards,  was  sent  with 
other  distinguished  gentlemen  on  a  mission  to  that  be- 
8* 


16*          RESPONSIBILITY    OP    THE    SOUTHERN    CHURCH. 

nighted  city,  to  stir  up  its  sluggish  waters.  He  went  and 
surveyed  the  ground,  canvassing  the  matter  with  leading 
citizens  privately,  but  met  with  little  success.  He  was 
about  to  abandon  the  field  of  his  missionary  enterprise  in 
despair. 

At  length,  it  was  agreed  that  Dr.  Palmer  should  be 
sounded  by  some  of  his  friends,  and  it  was  found  that  he 
was  willing  to  break  ground,  publicly.  He  entered  on  the 
work  con  amore,  and  preached  on  Thanksgiving  Day. 
The  result  is  known.  Previous  to  the  29th  of  November, 
Mr.  Toombs,  in  the  role  of  a  missionary,  was  likely  to 
prove  a  sad  failure.  True,  indeed,  his  native  abilities,  edu 
cation,  long  course  of  training,  and  other  qualifications  for 
the  peculiar  work  in  hand,  were  of  a  high  order,  but  he 
could  make  no  headway,  and  could  scarcely  get  a  congre 
gation  to  hear  his  discourses.  He  had  only  mistaken  his 
field.  He  had  come  among  a  people  where  the  heresy  of 
fealty  to  the  Union  was  too  deeply  rooted  for  him  to 
eradicate.  They  abjured  this  kind  of  "  political  preachers." 
They  must  first  hear  the  new  Gospel,  founded  on  slavery  as 
the  chief  "  corner-stone,"  from  the  pulpit  rather  than  the 
rostrum.  Dr.  Palmer  supplied  what  Mr.  Toombs  lacked, 
and  the  effect  was  sudden  and  wonderful.  Mr.  Toombs 
had  sown  some  seed,  but  Dr.  Palmer  gathered  an  imme 
diate  harvest.  It  was  found,  after  the  delivery  of  his  ser 
mon,  that  the  secession  mania  spread  like  fire  in  a  prairie  ; 
a  great  revival  of  the  spirit  of  latent  treason  occurred,  and 
conversions  to  the  new  faith  were  greatly  multiplied. 

Dr.  Palmer's  congregation,  by  far  the  largest  and  most 
influential  in  the  city,  were  mostly  taken  by  surprise,  and 
some  among  its  leading  men  at  first  strongly  dissented. 
But  his  eloquence,  always  of  a  high  order  of  a  certain  kind, 
carried  the  mass  of  his  hearers  captive,  and  the  dissentients 
at  length  for  the  most  part  yielded.  His  discourse  was 


SPECIMEN    OF    THANKSGIVING    DISCOURSE.  165 

immediately  published,  not  only  in  New  Orleans,  but  in 
Georgia  and  South  Carolina,  and  spread  over  the  South 
far  and  wide.  We  have  in  our  possession  copies  of  it  from 
several  different  editions.  This  was  the  work  of  Novem 
ber,  1860. 

SPECIMEN    OF    HIS    THANKSGIVING    DISCOURSE. 

Afe\v  passages  from  this  discourse  are  here  given,  simply 
to  show  the  lead  which  the  Church  took,  through  her  ablest 
ministers,  at  the  earliest  moment,  and  before  the  seces 
sion  of  a  single  State.  His  treasonable  exhortations  are 
found  in  the  introduction,  and  pervade  every  part  of  his 
discourse.  We  give  a  sample  of  them  : 

In  the  triumph  of  a  sectional  majority,  we  are  compelled  to  read  the 
probable  doom  of  our  once  happy  and  united  Confederacy.  *  *  * 
The  hour  has  come.  At  a  juncture  so  solemn  as  the  present,  with  the 
destiny  of  a  great  people  waiting  upon  the  decision  of  an  hour,  it  is  not 
lawful  to  be  still.  Whoever  may  have  influence  to  shape  public  opinion, 
at  such  a  time  must  lend  it,  or  prove  faithless  to  a  trust  as  solemn  as 
any  to  be  accounted  for  at  the  bar  of  God. 

Truer  words  were  never  spoken,  both  as  to  the  duty 
and  the  responsibility.  Dr.  Palmer  had  such  influence ; 
but  how  disastrously  did  he  use  it !  But  hear  him  further : 

Is  it  immodest  in  me  to  assume  that  I  may  represent  a  class  whose 
opinions  in  such  a  controversy  are  of  cardinal  importance — the  class 
which  seeks  to  ascertain  its  duty  in  the  light  simply  of  conscience  and 
religion,  and  which  turns  to  the  moralist  and  the  Christian  for  support 
and  guidance  ?  The  question,  too,  which  now  places  us  upon  the  brink 
of  revolution,  was,  in  its  origin,  a  question  of  morals  and  religion.* 
It  was  debated  in  ecclesiastical  councils  before  it  entered  Legislative 
halls.  *  *  *  The  right  determination  of  this  primary  question  will 

*  Why  cannot  Prof.  Christy,  and  all  that  class  of  Northern  "allies"  of  the  South, 
as  Jefferson  termed  such  men  in  his  day,— who  are  ever  declaiming:,  when  the 
Church  takes  action  upon  slavery,  that  she  is  meddling  with  that  which  does  not 
properly  concern  her,— learn  a  lesson  here  from  their  friends  ?  Dr.  Palmer  allows 
slavery,  the  "question"  to  which  he  here  refers,  a  place  within  the  domain  of 
"morals  and  religion;"  but  they  call  it  "politics.'' 


166          RESPONSIBILITY    OF   THE    SOUTHERN    CHURCH. 

go  far  towards  fixing  the  attitude  we  must  assume  in  the  coming 
struggle. 

How  clearly  does  he  recognize  the  fact  that  the  people 
of  God,  and  the  mass  of  the  community  too,  look  to  their 
religious  teachers  for  guidance;  and  how  momentous  must 
be  the  guilt  if  they  lead  them  astray, — into  treason,  rebel 
lion,  and  war,  against  lawful  authority  embodied  in  a 
Government  which  their  own  ablest  statesmen  declared, 
during  the  very  month  when  Dr.  Palmer  preached,  had 
done  the  South  no  manner  of  harm  !* 

*  Mr.  Stephens,  the  rebel  Vice-President,  in  a  speech  hefore  the  Georgia  Legisla 
ture,  November  14, 1860,  says :  "The  first  question  that  presents  itself  is,  Shall  the 
people  of  the  South  secede  from  the  Union  in  consequence  of  the  election  of  Mr. 
Lincoln  to  the  Presidency  of  the  United  States?  My  countrymen,  /  tell  you 
frankly,  candidly,  and  earnestly,  that  1  do  not  think  they  ought.  *  *  *  To 
make  a  point  of  resistance  to  the  Government ;  to  withdraw  from  it,  when  a  man 
has  been  constitutionally  elected,  puts  us  in  the  wrong.  We  are  pledged  to  main 
tain  the  Constitution.  Many  of  us  have  sworn  to  support  it.  *  *  *  Let  not  the 
South,  let  us  not  be  the  ones  to  commit  the  aggression.  We  went  into  the  election 
with  this  people.  The  result  was  different  from  what  we  wished;  but  the  election 
has  been  constitutionally  held.  Were  we  to  make  a  point  of  resistance  to  the  Gov 
ernment,  and  go  out  of  the  Union  on  that  account,  the  record  would  be  made  up 
hereafter  against  us.  *  *  *  I  do  not  anticipate  that  Lincoln  will  do  any  thing  to 
jeopard  our  safety  or  security.  *  *  *  He  can  do  nothing  unless  he  is  backed  by 
power  in  Congress.  The  House  of  Eepresentatives  is  largely  in  the  majority  against 
him.  In  the  Senate  he  will  also  be  powerless.  There  will  be  a  majority  of  four 
against  him.  *  *  *  Why,  then,  I  say,  should  we  disrupt  the  ties  of  this  Union 
•when  his  hands  are  tied,  when  he  can  do  nothing  against  us?  *  *  *  My  coun 
trymen,  I  am  not  of  those  who  believe  this  Union  has  been  a  curse  up  to  this  time. 

*  *    *     This  Government  of  our  fathers,  with  all  its  defects,  comes  nearer  tli* 
objects  of  all  good  Governments  than  any  other  on  thefy.ce  of  the  earth.     This  13 
my  settled  conviction.     Contrast  it  nmc  with  any  on  the  face  of  the  earth.    *    *    * 
This  Model  Republic  is  the  best  which  the  history  of  the  world  gives  any  account 
of.    *    *    *    Where  will  you  go,  following  the  sun  in  his  circuit  round  the  globr, 
to  find  a  Government  that  better  protects  the  liberties  of  its  people,  and  secures  to 
them  the  blessings  we  enjoy?    I  think  that  one  of  the  evils  that  beset  us  is  a  surfeit 
of  liberty,  an  exuberance  of  the  priceless  blessings  for  which  we  are  ungrateful. 

*  *    *    Suppose  it  be  admitted  that  all  of  these  are  evils  in  the  system,  do  thoy 
overbalance  and  outweigh  the  advantages  and  great  good  which  this  same  Govern 
ment  affords,  in  a  thousand  innumerable  ways  that  cannot  be  estimated  ?     Have  we 
not  at  the  South,  as  well  as  at  the  North,  grown  great,  prosperous,  and  happy  under 
its  operation?    Has  any  part  of  the  world  ever  shown  such  rapid  progress  in  the 
development  of  wealth,  and  all  the  material  resources  of  national  power  and  great 
ness,  as  the  Southern  /States  have  under  the  General  Government)  notwitlmtund- 


WAK   WELCOMED. THE    UNION    DENOUNCED.  167 

RESISTANCE    COUNSELLED. — THE   LAST   DITCH. 

But  to  proceed  with  this  traitorous  and  war-exhorting 
discourse.  On  speaking  of  the  "trust"  committed  to  the 
South,  "  to  preserve  and  transmit  our  existing  system  of 
domestic  servitude,"  he  says  : 

This  trust  we  will  discharge  in  the  face  of  the  worst  possible  peril. 
Though  war  be  the  aggregation  of  all  evils,  yet,  should  the  madness  of 
the  hour  appeal  to  the  arbitration  of  the  sword,  we  will  not  shrink  even 
from  the  baptism  of  fire.  If  modern  crusaders  stand  in  serried  ranks 
upon  some  plain  of  Esdraelon,  there  shall  we  be  in  defence  of  our  trust. 
Not  till  the  last  man  has  fallen  behind  the  last  rampart,  shall  it  drop  from 
our  hands ;  and  then  only  in  surrender  to  the  God  who  gave  it. 

This,  we  presume,  is  the  true  origin  of  the  favorite 
phrase, — so  far  QS  the  present  war  is  concerned, — which 
has  filled  so  large  a  space  in  Southern  belligerent  literature, 
of  "  dying  in  the  last  ditch."  As  to  the  "  surrender"  of 
the  "  trust"  of  preserving  and  transmitting  slavery,  for 
which  the  rebellion  was  undertaken,  events  look  very 
much  as  though  God  had  already  made  the  demand. 

WAR   WELCOMED. THE    UNION    DENOUNCED. 

But  there  is  more  treason  and  war  here,  and  so  much 
indeed  that  one  can  almost  take  the  sentences  at  random  : 

The  moment  must  arise  when  the  conflict  must  be  joined,  and  victory 

ing  all  its  defects?  *  *  *  This  appeal  to  go  out,  with  all  the  provisions  for 
good  that  accompany  it,  I  look  upon  as  a  great,  and  I  fear  a  fatal  temptation.  When 
I  look  around  and  see  our  prosperity  in  every  thing,  agriculture,  commerce,  art, 
science,  and  every  department  of  education,  physical  and  mental  as  well  as  moral 
advancement,  and  our  colleges,  I  think,  in  the  face  of  such  an  exhibition,  if  we  can 
without  the  loss  of  power,  or  any  essential  right  or  interest,  remain  in  the  Union,  it 
is  our  duty  to  ourselves  and  to  posterity  to  do  so." 

While  this  FOREMOST  STATESMAN  of  the  South  was  thus  truthfully  portraying  be 
fore  the  Georgia  Legislature  the  blessings  of  the  Union,  and  the  great  prosperity 
and  good  of  every  kind,  to  every  part  of  the  country,  resulting  from  the  action  of  the 
General  Government,  THE  LEADING  CLERGYMEN  of  the  South,  in  that  very  month  of 
November,  were,  from  the  pulpit  and  the  press,  striving  to  bring  that  Government 
into  contempt  in  the  eyes  of  all  men,  and  were  exhorting  to  treason  and  rebellion 
against  it,  braving  defiantly  all  the  horrors  of  war! 


168          RESPONSIBILITY    OF    THE    SOUTHERN    CHURCH. 

decide  for  one  or  the  other.,  *  *  *  Is  it  possible  that  we  can  hesitate 
longer  than  a  moment  ?  '  In  our  natural  recoil  from  the  perils  of  revolu 
tion,  and  with  our  clinging  fondness  for  the  memories  of  the  past,  wo 
may  perhaps  look  around  for  something  to  soften  the  asperity  of  the 
issue,  for  some  ground  on  which  we  may  defer  the  day  of  evil,  for  some 
hope  that  the  gathering  clouds  may  not  burst  in  fury  upon  the  land. 

Then,  after  answering  the  objections  of  those  who  might 
be  supposed  to  be  not  quite  ready  for  the  wicked  work  to 
which  he  exhorts  them,  and  to  strengthen  the  timid,  he 
proceeds : 

But  the  plea  is  idle.  *  *  *  I  say  it  with  solemnity  and  pain, 
this  Union  of  our  forefathers  is  already  gone.  *  *  *  I  throw  off  the 
yoke  of  this  Union  as  readily  as  did  our  ancestors  the  yoke  of  King 
George  III.,  and  for  causes  immeasurably  stronger  than  those  pleaded 
in  their  celebrated  Declaration. 

Then,  after  replying  to  other  objections  of  the  wavering 
and  the  Union-loving,  he  urges  "  the  Southern  States"  to 
"reclaim  the  powers  they  have  delegated;"  to  "  take  all 
the  necessary  steps  looking  to  separate  and  independent 
existence  ;"  and  "  thus,  prepared  for  every  contingency,"  to 
"  let  the  crisis  come."  Fearing  that  these  exhortations 
may  not  be  effective,  he  natters  Southern  pride  a  little  : 

The  position  of  the  South  is  at  this  moment  sublime.  If  she  has 
grace  given  her  to  know  her  hour,  she  will  save  herself,  the  country,  and 
the  world.  It  will  involve,  indeed,  temporary  prostration  and  distress  ; 
the  dikes  of  Holland  must  be  cut  to  save  her  from  the  troops  of  Philip. 
But  I  warn  my  countrymen,  the  historic  moment,  once  passed,  never 
returns. 

THE    PROPHECY    FULFILLED    UNEXPECTEDLY. 

It  is  a  noticeable  fact,  and  finds  its  illustrations  all  over 
the  Southern  rebel  States,  that  the  very  evils  which  the 
rebels  imagined  were  to  be  averted  by  their  revolt,  are  the 
evils  which  their  rebellion  has  brought  upon  them.  Dr. 


DR.  PALMER'S  SERMON  STEEPED  IN  SIN.          169 

Palmer,  in  view  of  the  consequences  of  "  submitting  to 
Lincoln,"  thus  warns  :  - 

Our  children  will  go  forth  beggared  from  the  homes  of  their  fathers. 
Fishermen  will  cast  their  nets  where  your  proud  commercial  navy  now 
rides  at  anchor,  and  dry  them  upon  the  shore  now  covered  with  your 
bales  of  merchandise.  Sapped,  circumvented,  undermined,  the  institu 
tions  of  your  soil  will  be  overthrown ;  and  within  fi ve-and-twenty  years, 
the  history  of  St.  Domingo  will  be  the  record  of  Louisiana. 

The  picture  here  drawn  of  New  Orleans  is  wellnigh 
true,  but  from  "  resistance"  rather  than  "  submission,"  and 
much  sooner  than  was  anticipated  ;  and  so  of  the  South  at 
large.  We  hope  the  horrors  of  St.  Domingo  are  not  to  be 
added  to  what  they  already  suffer,  but  if  they  are,  poster 
ity  will  blame  none  but  the  rebels  themselves. 

On  the  last  page  of  this  eloquent  utterance  of  treason, 
Dr.  Palmer  says : 

I  am  impelled  to  deepen  the  sentiment  of  resistance  in  the  Southern  mind, 
and  to  strengthen  the  current  now  flowing  toward  a  union  of  the  South 
in  defence  of  her  chartered  rights.  It  is  a  duty  which  I  shall  not 
be  called  to  repeat,  for  such  awful  junctures  do  not  occur  twice  in  a 
century. 

HIS    SERMON    STEEPED    IN    SIN,    GUILT,    AND    CRIME. 

No  man  who  has  correct  ideas  of  the  moral  responsi 
bility  of  a  minister  of  the  Gospel  in  the  pulpit, — to  God 
and  religion,  to  society  and  civil  government, — can  rise 
from  the  perusal  of  this  discourse,  delivered  at  such 
a  juncture  and  in  such  a  place,  without  a  painful  sense 
of  the  great  guilt  of  making  such  an  utterance.  Our 
hope  is,  that  such  men  may  see  the  sin  and  repent  of 
it  before  they  die.  IT  WAS  A  SIN,  AND  AN  EXHORTATION 
TO  SIN. 

It  will  be  seen  from  the  date  of  the  discourse,  that  three 
vieeks  before  the  secession  of  the  first  State,  and  before 


170          RESPONSIBILITY    OF    THE    SOUTHERN    CHURCH. 

any  public  movement  for  secession  had  been  made  in  New 
Orleans,  and  while  the  masses  of  the  people  there  were 
still  strongly  attached  to  the  Union,  as  is  known  by  the 
Union  meetings  which  were  held  long  afterwards,  Dr. 
Palmer  threw  himself  into  the  van  and  made  these  bold 
utterances  for  treason.  He  mounted  the  very  crest  of  the 
wave  and  became  the  king  of  the  storm. 

HE    FURTHER   VINDICATES    SECESSION. 

In  April,  1861,  Dr.  Palmer  published  in  the  Southern 
Presbyterian  (quarterly)  Review  his  "  Vindication  of  Se 
cession  and  the  South."  In  this  article,  as  Dr.  Thornwell 
had  done  before  him  in  the  same  periodical,  he  argues  at 
length  in  favor  of  the  Constitutional  right  of  secession, 
justifying  it  on  the  charge  that  the  rights  of  slavery  had 
been  infringed  and  were  in  danger.  Here,  Dr.  Palmer 
again  strikes  out  boldly  for  secession,  vindicating  it  in 
seven  States  which  had  already  gone  out,  and  indicating 
the  hope  and  making  the  prophecy  that  all  the  remaining 
slave  States  would  follow  them.  We  give  a  brief  extract 
from  the  article,  where  he  speaks  of  the  course  of  South 
Carolina,  his  native  State  : 

"When  all  hope  of  safety  had  died  within  her,  she  stood  calmly  under 
the  shadow  of  the  Capitol,  before  the  clock  which  silently  told  the  Nation's 
hours,  and  which  would  ere  long  sound  the  knell  of  its  destiny.  No 
sooner  was  this  heard,  in  the  shout  of  Black  Republican  success,  than 
she  leaped,  feeble  handed  and  alone,  into  the  deadly  breach.  History 
has  nowhere  upon  her  records  a  more  sublime  example  of  moral  hero 
ism.  Ignorant  whether  she  would  be  supported,  even  by  her  sister 
across  the  Savannah,  relying  on  nothing  save  the  righteousness  of  her 
cause  and  the  power  of  God,  she  took  upon  her  shield  and  spear  as 
desperate  and  as  sacred  a  conflict  as  ever  made  a  State  immortal.  *  *  * 
The  Genius  of  history  has  already  wreathed  the  garland  with  which 
her  brow  shall  be  decked.  Long  may  she  live,  the  mother  of  heroes 
who  shall  be  worthy  of  their  birth  1 


REV.    THOS.    SMYTH,    D.    D.  171 

There  is  the  same  strain  of  eloquent  treason  all  through 
the  article.  But  we  forbear  further  quotations,  as  we  have 
given  the  same  sentiments,  at  considerable  length,  in  his 
earlier  utterances. 

REV.  THOMAS  SMYTH,  D.  D.,  STRIKES  THE  SAME  CHORD. 

Among  many  other  examples  of  labored  essays  and  dis 
courses  similar  to  the  foregoing,  we  give  but  one.  Dr. 
Thomas  Smyth,  of  Charleston,  S.  C.,  a  distinguished  eccle 
siastical  author,  has  written  one  of  the  most  earnest  and 
passionate  articles  which  the  literature  of  the  rebellion 
has  produced.  It  is  found  in  the  Southern  Presbyterian 
Review  for  April,  1863,  entitled,  "The  War  of  the  South 
Vindicated,"  and  is  divided  into  four  parts,  as  follows  : 
"  1.  The  war  of  the  South  is  in  self-defence  ;  2.  The  war 
of  the  South  vindicated  by  the  fundamental  principles  of 
American  Liberty ;  3.  The  war  of  the  South  is  justified 
as  a  defensive  war  against  fanatical  abolition  ;  4.  The 
Divine  right  of  secession." 

Like  all  Southern  writers,  he  makes  the  dangers  to  be 
apprehended  to  slavery,  the  cause  of  secession  and  justify 
ing  resistance  to  the  Government ;  and  making  slavery,  in 
its  preservation  and  extension,  a  religious  duty,  he  thus 
justifies  the  war  on  their  part : 

Wo  have  taken  up  arms  for  the  defence  of  our  civil  and  religious 
rights,  and  God,  our  country,  and  the  world  at  large,  call  upon  us  to 
acquit  ourselves  like  men,  for  our  wives  and  our  little  ones,  for  our 
homes,  our  sanctuaries,  and  even  our  religion  itself.  *  *  *  .  The  war 
now  carried  on  by  the  North  is  a  war  against  slavery,  and  is,  therefore, 
treasonable  rebellion  against  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States,  and 
against  the  word,  providence,  and  government  of  God. 

The  groundless  assertions  of  Dr.  Smyth  form  a  striking 
characteristic  of  the  article  : 


172          RESPONSIBILITY    OF   THE    SOUTHERN    CHURCH. 

The  Missouri  Compromise,  forced  upon  the  South  by  the  North,  only 
to  be  immediately  and  constantly  resisted  and  perverted,  rung  the 
death-knell  of  the  Union.  *  *  *  The  North  first  entrapped  the 
South  into  the  Union,  under  false  pretences  and  hypocritical  promises. 
*  *  *  The  sure  beginning  of  the  sad  end  was  formally  laid  down  in 
the  platform  of  the  Republican  party,  on  whose  basis  the  present  aboli 
tion  administration  was  clothed  with  power  to  rend  the  Union,  and  to 
involve  in  one  common  ruin  the  happiness  of  both  North  and  South. 

The  total  untruthfulness  of  what  is  here  asserted  about 
this  "  platform,"  we  have  demonstrated  in  previous  pages. 

JUDGMENT   AND    BLESSING. 

Here  is  a  contrast  between  the  North  and  the  South : 
This  war  is  a  judgment  upon  the  North,  for  its  persistent,  perjured, 
abolition  fanaticism.  Nearly  severing  the  Union  in  1790,  it  rung  its 
death-knell  in  1820,  and  has  since  then  inflamed  an  irrepressible  con 
flict,  which  has  now  destroyed  the  Union,  and  is  overwhelming  the 
North  in  inextricable  difficulties. 

Dr.  Smyth  thus  regards  attempts  to  destroy  the  Union 
as  wicked,  bringing  down  Divine  judgment.  What,  then, 
is  the  South  to  receive  for  her  present  attempt  ?  Only 
blessing,  in  this  way  : 

God  is  working  out  a  problem  in  the  physical,  social,  political,  and 
world-wide  beneficial  character  of  slavery,  as  a  great  missionary  agency, 
of  unexampled  prosperity  and  success,  which  He  is  now  demonstrating  to 
the  family  of  nations.  In  this  war  the  South,  therefore,  is  on  God's 
side.  She  has  His  word,  and  providence,  and  omnipotent  government, 
with  her.  And  if  she  is  found  faithful  to  Him,  and  to  this  institution, 
which  He  has  put  under  her  spiritual  care,  then  the  heavens  and  earth 
may  pass  away,  but  God  will  not  fail  to  vindicate  His  eternal  providence, 
and  defend  and  deliver  His  people,  who  walk  in  His  statutes  and  com 
mandments  blameless. 

RESISTANCE   UNIVERSALLY   INSTILLED. 

This  whole  article  is  very  much 'of  the  character  of  the 
foregoing  extracts.  We  give  its  closing  paragraph,  as  an 
example  to  show  how  the  Southern  clergy,  besides  being 


THE    CLERGY    OF    ALL    DENOMINATIONS.  173 

leaders  in  treason,  have  blown  the  rebel  war-trumpet  from 
first  to  last : 

Let  the  spirit  of  resistance  be  infused,  with  its  mother's  milk,  into  the 
baby  in  its  cradle.  Let  it  mingle  with  the  plays  of  childhood.  Let  it 
animate  the  boy  in  its  mimic  manhood ;  the  maiden  in  the  exercise  of 
her  magic,  spell-binding  influence ;  the  betrothed  in  her  soul-subduing 
trance  of  hope  and  memory ;  the  bride  at  the  altar ;  the  wife  in  the  arms 
of  her  rejoicing  husband  ;  the  young  mother  amid  her  whirl  of  ecstatic 
joy ;  the  matron  in  the  bosom  of  her  admiring  children ;  and  the  father 
as  he  dreams  fondly  of  the  fortune  and  glory  of  his  aspiring  sons — let  it 
five  the  man  of  business  at  his  place  of  merchandise ;  the  lawyer  among 
his  briefs  ;  the  mechanic  in  his  workshop  :  the  planter  in  his  fields ;  the 
laborer  as  he  plies  his  pruning-hook  and  follows  his  plough ; — let  the 
trumpet  blow  in  Zion,  and  let  all  her  watchmen  lift  up  their  voice ; — let  all 
the  people,  everywhere,  old  and  young,  bond  and  free,  take  up  the  war- 
cry,  and  say,  each  to  his  neighbor,  "  Gather  ye  together,  and  come 
against  them,  and  rise  up  to  the  battle." 

These  extracts  would  seem  to  show  that  the  fervency  of 
the  clergy  of  the  South  in  the  rebel  cause  advances  witli 
the  progress  of  events.  Dr.  Smyth,  if  possible,  is  more 
intensified  with  the  furor  and  frenzy  of  the  strife  than  the 
other  South  Carolina  Doctors.  But  these  things  from  his 
pen  were  written  at  a  later  period.  Nor  have  we  given 
by  any  means  the  most  glowing  of  his  sentences,  as  will  be 
seen  in  a  subsequent  chapter,  where  we  illustrate  another 
phase  of  the  subject. 

THE     CLERGY     OF     ALL     DENOMINATIONS     AID     THE     REBEL 
LION. 

Other  ministers  of  every  denomination  all  over  the  Soutl 
joined  in  urging  on  the  rebellion,  and  some  of  the  more 
distinguished  of  them  were  as  early  in  the  work  as  those 
we  have  mentioned.  The  course  of  the  Right  Reverend 
Leonidas  Polk,  D.  D.,  Bishop  of  the  Episcopal  Church  in 
Louisiana,  early  a  Major-General  in  the  rebel  army  (lately 


1  74          RESPONSIBILITY    OF   THE    SOUTHERN    CHURCH.- 

killed  in  battle  in  Georgia),  is  too  well  known  to  need 
any  thing  more  than  to  be  named.  Bishop  Elliott,  of  Geor 
gia,  Cobb,  of  Alabama,  Green,  of  Mississippi,  all  of  the  same 
Church, — and,  indeed,  nearly  all  the  influential  ministers  of 
all  the  Protestant  denominations  in  the  South, — took  early 
position  and  gave  the  whole  weight  of  their  social  and  offi 
cial  influence  in  direct  aid  of  the  rebellion.  Names  of  the 
most  distinguished  could  be  given  in  great  number  if  neces 
sary.  Drs.  Mitchell,  of  Alabama,  and  Waddel,  President 
of  La  Grange  College,  Tennessee,  wrote  elaborate  articles 
in  aid  of  the  rebellion  at  a  very  early  period. 

Every  religious  newspaper  of  the  rebel  States, — and  they 
were  all  edited  by  ministers  of  the  Gospel, — located  at 
Nashville,  New  Orleans,  Columbia,  Fayetteville,  Rich 
mond,  and  other  cities,  urged  secession  in  most  cases  from 
the  first  step  in  the  movement,  and  in  all  at  a  very  early 
period.  And  the  houses  of  worship  of  all  denominations, 
from  first  to  last,  have  echoed  the  utterances  of  treason  and 
rebellion  from  the  pulpit  in  all  parts  of  the  South. 

LEADING    CLERGYMEN   IN    THE    REBEL    ARMY. 

Many  distinguished  ministers,  after  preparing  those 
under  their  care  for  the  terrible  work  of  war  in  defence  of 
the  treason  they  had  inspire.d,  led  them  to  the  field  in  per 
son.  Dr.  Atkinson,  President  of  Hampden  Sidney  College, 
Virginia,  became  Captain  of  a  company  composed  mostly 
of  his  College  students,  fought  in  the  first  battles  of  the 
war,  was  taken  prisoner  at  Rich  Mountain,  Western 
Virginia,  and  was  paroled.  Dr.  Dabney,*  Professor  in 

*  At  the  beginning  of  the  movement  for  secession,  Dr.  Dabney  took  strong  ground 
for  peace,  urging  his  brethren  farther  South  to  desist.  In  an  Address  to  Christians 
"of  the  Southern  country,"  dated,  "  Hampden  Sidney,  Nov.  24,  1860."  he  says: 
"Whence,  too,  is  the  great  divisive  question  borrowed?  Is  it  not  from  Chris 
tianity  ?  Her  sacred  authority  is  the  one  which  is  invoked  to  sanctify  the  strife" 
Ho  here  refers  to  that  feature  of  Southern  "Christianity,"— modern  views  of  B!R- 


MINISTERS    GO    SOUTH    AND   AID    THE    REBELLION.      175 

the  Union  Theological  Seminary,  Virginia,  early  became  an 
Adjutant-General  in  the  army,  and  was  upon  the  staff  of 
Stonewall  Jackson.  Dr.  McNeill,  for  many  years  one  of 
the  Secretaries  of  the  American  Bible  Society,  and  living  in 
New  York,  left  his  post  and  returned  to  his  former  resi 
dence  in  North  Carolina,  joined  the  army  as  a  Lieutenant- 
Colonel,  and  was  seriously  wounded  in  a  cavalry  contest 
at  one  of  the  Mountain  Gaps  in  Virginia,  just  before  the 
battle  of  Gettysburg.  And  besides  these,  many  other  min 
isters  of  distinction  have  had  military  commands  in  the 
rebel  armies.  Dr.  Palmer,  of  New  Orleans,  after  that  city 
was  occupied  by  the  national  forces,  went  on  a  mission  to 
the  rebel  army  in  Northern  Mississippi,  and  harangued  the 
troops  at  various  points  ;  and  the  testimony  of  one  of  the 
Generals  in  command  was,  that  his  services  were  worth 
more  to  the  rebel  cause  than  a  soldiery  of  ten  thousand 
men.  We  cannot  vouch  for  the  fact,  but  it  has  been  fre 
quently  stated  in  New  Orleans  within  the  present  year,  and 
has  been  published  in  some  of  the  religious  journals  of  the 
country  quite  recently,  that  Dr.  Palmer  is  now  a  Colonel  in 
the  rebel  army.  It  has  also  been  published  that  he  is  a 
chaplain.  Both  are  probably  true. 

MANY   MINISTERS    GO    SOUTH    AND    AID    THE    REBELLION. 

While  an  exodus  of  ministers  took  place  from  the  South 
immediately  after  the  rebellion  began,  either  leaving  vol 
untarily,  from  patriotic  motives,  or  being  driven  out  on 
account  of  their  Union  sentiments,  many  ministers,  some 
of  Northern  and  some  of  Southern 'birth,  left  their  stations 
at  the  North  arid  went  South  to  give  in  their  adhesion  and 
influence  to  the  Southern  Confederacy.  Among  others  of 

very, — as  the  cause  of  "  the  strife  ;"  and  charges  upon  the  religious  portion  of  tho 
community  a  heavy  responsibility.  But,  a  little  later,  despite  his  earnest  call  to 
peace,  he  took  the  sword  himself,  and  mingled  in  "  the  strife.1' 


176          RESPONSIBILITY    OF    THE    SOUTHERN    CHURCH. 

distinction,  are  the  following  :  Dr.  John  Leighton  Wilson, 
leaving  his  secretaryship  in  New  York,  wont  to  South 
Carolina.  Dr.  Hoge,  of  New  York,  colleague  of  Dr.  Spring, 
though  born  and  educated  in  Ohio,  son  of  a  former  Pro 
fessor  in  the  Ohio  University,  at  Athens,  himself  afterwards 
Professor  and  Pastor  there,  resigned  his  charge  in  New 
York  and  went  to  Virginia.  Dr.  Leyburn,  of  Philadelphia, 
and  Dr.  Lacy,  of  Frankfort,  Kentucky,  gave  up  their  re 
spective  posts  as  Editor  and  Pastor  and  went  to  Virginia. 
And  many  other  well-known  cases  occurred  in  various  parts 
of  the  country,  which  many  persons  will  remember.  The 
motive  for  these  movements,  openly  avowed,  was  the  sym 
pathy  felt  for  the  cause  in  which  the  rebel  States  had 
embarked. 

OTHER  REBEL  CLERGYMEN  AT  THE  SOUTH. 

As  our  armies  have  advanced  into  the  rebel  territory, 
while  many  of  the  people  have  rejoiced  in  the  deliverance 
thus  afforded,  and  while  in  this  number  may  possibly  be 
found,  here  and  there,  a  minister  of  the  Gospel, — though 
the  cases  of  which  we  have  heard  are  remarkably  few,  and 
that,  too,  over  the  extensive  regions  of  the  Southwest 
where  we  are  personally  acquainted, — many  clergymen 
have  only  availed  themselves  of  the  approach  of  the  Union 
forces  to  show  a  deeper  hatred  to  the  Union,  and  have  been 
kept  partially  quiet  only  by  reluctant  oaths  of  allegiance  ; 
while  many  others  have  gone,  in  advance  of  the  armies, 
"  farther  into  the  Confederacy,"  or  are  now  enjoying,  in 
the  loyal  States,  the  protection  of  that  Government  whose 
overthrow  they  desire.  Among  these,  are  Drs.  Palmer, 
Leacock,  Goodrich,  Mr.  Hall,  and  others,  from  the  single 
city  of  New  Orleans  ;  Dr.  Leacock,  a  native  of  Old  England, 
and  Di.  Goodrich,  a  native  of  New  England,  both  of  whom 
refused  to  take  the  oath  of  allegiance,  and  were  required 


SOUTHERN    CHURCHES    ORGANIZED.  177 

to  leave  the  city ;  Messrs.  Marshall,  Lord,  Rutherford, 
and  one  other,  of  four  different  denominations,  and  some 
of  them  of  Northern  birth,  left  Vicksburg  on  the  fall  of 
that  city,  and  went  "  into  the  Confederacy ;"  besides 
others,  located  in  Nashville  and  Memphis,  and  in  many  of 
the  towns  of  Northern  and  Western  Virginia;  and,  in 
deed,  from  almost  every  important  city  and  village, 
wherever  Churches  were  planted,  have  similar  exits 
occurred,  as  the  national  arms  have  recovered  the 
country. 

SOUTHERN    CHURCHES    ORGANIZED    IN    AID    OF    THE 
REBELLION. 

Besides  the  influence  which  so  many  of  the  ministry  in 
the  rebel  States,  in  the  many  ways  mentioned,  have 
exerted  in  aid  of  the  rebellion,  the  Church  as  a  body,  and 
in  its  separate  organizations,  was  early  consecrated  to  the 
same  work. 

The  leading  ministers,  and  other  influential  men  in  the 
respective  Churches  of  all  denominations,  at  the  earliest 
moment,  brought  all  the  religious  bodies  of  the  South  to 
break  their  connection  with  those  of  the  North, — that  is, 
with  those  religious  organizations  which  hitherto  were  co 
extensive  with  the  Union, — changed  their  formularies  of 
Church  Polity,  their  Prayer-Books,  and  Directories  for 
Worship,  so  as  to  give  in  their  adhesion  to  the  Government 
set  up  by  the  rebels,  and  thus  recognize  it  as  a  lawfully 
established  Civil  Power.  The  words  "  United  States  of 
America"  were  blotted  out,  and  the  words  "  Confederate 
States  of  America"  took  their  place,  in  the  Liturgies, 
Prayers,  and  Standards  of  Faith,  of  every  Church  in  the 
rebel  dominions. 

It  is  to  be  especially  noted  here,  that  THE  CHURCH,  as 
such, — the  Church  in  its  organic  capacity  as  a  spiritual 


178         RESPONSIBILITY    OF   THE    SOUTHERN    CHURCH. 

body,  acting  through  its  highest  corporate  tribunals,  and 
not  its  individual  members  in  their  capacity  as  citizens, 
— made  these  radical  and  formal  changes  BEFORE  the 
"  Southern  Confederacy"  had  been  recognized  as  a  lawful 
Civil  Power,  or  admitted  into  the  family  of  nations,  either 
de  jure  or  de  facto,  by  any  Civil  Power  of  the  world. 
And  not  only  was  this  done  while  the  contest  of  arms, 
whose  issue  should  decide  the  claim  of  the  Confederacy  to 
such  consideration,  was  pending,  but  it  was  done  at  the 
earliest  convenient  moment  after  the  opening  of  the  strife; 
and,  in  some  cases,  the  initiatory  steps  of  ecclesiastical 
bodies,  which  culminated  in  this  more  general  action, 
were  taken  at  the  very  beginning ;  and,  in  some  others, 
even  before  the  Southern  "  Confederate  Government"  was 
formed,  or  the  States,  out  of  which  it  was  at  length 
organized,  had  seceded.  Such  facts  as  these,  in  a  most 
striking  manner,  illustrate  the  animus  of  the  Church,  and 
show  its  tremendous  responsibility,  not  only  for  its  sup 
port  of  the  rebellion,  but  for  the  lead  which  the  Church 
took  in  the  cause,  under  the  guidance  of  those  men  whose 
sentiments  we  have  given,  who  preached,  prayed,  wrote, 
labored,  and  finally  fought,  for  it  from  the  beginning. 

As  an  instance  of  the  Church's  course  in  anticipating 
the  State  in  its  eagerness  for  secession,  it  may  be  noted 
for  illustration,  that  before  the  secession  of  South  Carolina, 
the  Presbyterian  Synod  of  that  State,  by  the  most  delibe 
rate  and  formal  action,  under  the  lead  of  Rev.  Dr.  John 
B.  Adger,  Professor  in  the  Theological  Seminary  at 
Columbia,  decided  to  cast  in  its  fortunes  with  those  of  the 
State  in  case  it  should  secede  from  the  Union ;  thus 
becoming  an  accessory  before  the  fact  to  the  crime  of 
treason,  and  giving  the  influence  of  the  Church,  and 
pledging  its  support  in  encouragement  of  politicians,  to 
commit  the  highest  crime  known  to  the  laws. 


PRESBYTERIAN    CHURCH.  179 

Rev.  Dr.  Yerkes,  in  the  Danville  Review  for  September, 
3861,  thus  alludes  to  this  proceeding  on  the  part  of  the 
Synod  of  South  Carolina  : 

If  the  statement  made  on  the  floor  of  the  Assembly  (at  Philadelphia, 
May,  1861)  is  to  be  credited,  that  Synod  approved  in  advance  the  act  of 
secession  which  it  was  well  known  the  State  Convention  would  pass. 
They  could  not  wait  till  the  foul  deed  was  done.  They  were  so  fondly 
anxious  to  baptize  the  cockatrice,  that  they  could  not  wait  till  the  cock's 
egg  hatched.  They  anticipated  the  monstrous  birth,  and  sanctioned  it 
by  a  decree  of  the  Church. 

ADDRESSES      OF     SOUTHERN      CHURCHES      SUSTAINING     THE 
REBELLION. 

Besides  organizing  all  the  Southern  Churches  on  the 
basis  of  supporting  the  rebellion,  and  changing  their 
respective  corporate  titles  so  as  to  conform  to  the  name 
of  the  rebel  Government,  the  larger  religious  bodies  at  the 
South  adopted  formal  addresses,  either  to  their  own 
people  or  to  the  Christian  world  at  large,  vindicating 
their  course  in  sustaining  the  rebellion  through  a  dis 
ruption  of  the  Church. 

THE    PRESBYTERIAN    CHURCH. 

Among  others,  the  largest  body  of  Presbyterians  at  the 
South  put  forth  an  address,  from  which  we  have  already 
quoted,  entitled,  "  Address  of  the  General  Assembly  of 
the  Presbyterian  Church  in  the  Confederate  States  of 
America,  to  all  the  Churches  throughout  the  Earth,"  in 
which  they  speak  as  follows : 

It  is  probably  known  to  you,  that  the  Presbyteries  and  Synods  in 
the  Confederate  States,  which  were  formerly  in  connection  with  the 
General  Assembly  of  the  Presbyterian  Church  in  the  United  States  of 
America,  have  renounced  the  jurisdiction  of  thai  body,  and  dissolved  the 
tits  which  bound  ihim  ecclesiastically  with  their  brethren  of  the  North.  *  *  * 
Commissioners,  duly  appointed  from  all  the  Presbyteries  of  these  Con- 
9 


180         RESPONSIBILITY    OF    THE    SOUTHERN    CHURCH. 

federate  States,  met  accordingly  in  the  city  of  Augusta  (Georgia),  on 
the  4th  day  of  December,  in  the  year  of  our  Lord  1861,  and  then  and 
there  proceeded  to  constitute  the  General  Assembly  of  the  Presbyterian 
Church  in  the  Confederate  States  of  America.  The  Constitution  of 
the  Presbyterian  Church  in  the  United  States,  that  is  to  say,  *  *  * 
were  unanimously  and  solemnly  declared  to  be  the  Constitution  of  the 
Church  in  the  Confederate  States,  with  no  other  change  than  the  sub 
stitution  of  "Confederate"  for  "United,"  wherever  the  country  is 
mentioned  in  the  standards.  The  Church,  therefore,  in  thc.se  seceded 
States,  presents  now  the  spectacle  of  a  separate,  independent,  and  complete 
organization,  under  the  style  and  title  of  the  Presbyterian  Church  in  the 
Confederate  States  of  America.  In  thus  taking  its  place  among  sister 
Churches  of  this  and  other  countries,  it  seems  proper  that  it  should  set 
forth  the  causes  which  have  impelled  it  to  separate  from  the  Church  of 
the  North,  and  to  indicate  a  general  view  of  the  course  which  it 
feels  it  incumbent  upon  it  to  pursue  in  the  new  circumstances  in  which 
it  is  placed.  *  *  *  A  political  theory  was,  to  all  intents  and  purposes, 
propounded,  which  made  secession  a  crime,  the  seceding  States  rebellious, 
and  the  citizens  who  obeyed  them  traitors.  *  *  *  The  Presbyterians  of 
these  Confederate  States  need  no  apology  for  bo  t  ing  to  the  decree  of 
Providence,  which,  IN  WITHDRAWING  THEIR  COUNTRY  FROM  THE  GOVERN 
MENT  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES,  has  at  ihe  same  t'me  determined  that  they 
should  withdraw  from  the  Church  of  their  fathers. 

THE    PKOTESTAXT    EPISCOPAL    CHURCH. 

Another  instance  is  si-en  in  the  ac  ion  of  the  Epi-co- 
pril  Church,  in  the  form  of  a  "  Pastoral  Letter  from  the 
Bishops  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church,  to  the 
Clergy  and  Laity  of  the  Church  in  the  Confederate  States 
of  America,''  issued  from  Augusta,  Georgia,  November  22, 
1862,  in  which  the  Bishops  say  : 

Forced  by  the  Providence  of  God  to  separate  ourselves  from  the  Protest 
ant  Episcopal  Church  in  the  United  States, — a  Church  with  whose  doc 
trine,  discipline,  and  worship,  we  are  in  entire  harmony,  and  with  whose 
action,  up  to  the  time  of  that  separation,  we  were  abundantly  satisfied. — 
at  a  moment  when  civil  strife  had  dipped  its  foot  in  blood,  and  cruel  Avar 
was  desolating  our  homes  and  firesides,  we  required  a  double  measure 
of  grace  to  preserve  the  accustomed  moderation  of  the  Church,  &c. 
*  *  *  The  Constitution  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  iu  the 


CHRISTIAN    ASSOCIATION.  181 

Confederate  States,  under  which  we  have  been  exercising  our  legislative 
functions,  is  the  same  as  that  from  which  we  have  been  providentially 
separated,  &c.  *  *  *  The  Prayer  Book  we  have  left  untouched  in 
every  particular,  save  where  a  change  of  our  Civil  Government  and  the 
formation  of  a  new  nation  have  made  alteration  essentially  requisite. 
Three  words  comprise  all  the  amendment  which  has  been  deemed  ne 
cessary  in  the  present  emergency.  [Among  several  "  sources  of  encou 
ragement,"  this  is  given:]  In  our  case,  we  go  forward  with  the  leading 
minds  of  our  new  Republic  cheering  us  on  by  their  communion  with  us,  and 
with  no  prejudications  to  overcome,  save  those  which  arise  from  a  lack 
of  acquaintance  with  our  doctrine  and  worship.  *  *  * 

Another  source  of  encouragement  is,  that  there  has  been  no  division 
in  the  Church  in  the  Confederate  States.  Believing,  with  a  wonderful 
unanimity,  that  the  providence  of  God  had  guided  our  footsteps,  and  for  His 
own  inscrutable  purposes  had  forced  us  into  a  separate  organization, 
there  has  been  nothing  to  embarrass  us  in  the  preliminary  movements 
which  have  conducted  us  to  our  present  position.  *  *  *  Many  of 
the  States  of  this  Confederacy  are  missionary.  *  *  *  Hitherto  has  their 
scanty  subsistence  been  eked  out  by  the  common  treasury  of  our  united 
Church.  Cut  off  from  that  resource  by  our  political  action,  in  which  they 
have  heartily  acquiesced,  they  turn  to  us  and  pray  us  to  do  at  least  as 
much  for  them,  as  we  have  been  accustomed  to  do  for  the  Church  from 
which  they  have  been  separated  by  a  civil  necessity.  *  *  *  It  is 
likewise  the  duty  of  the  Church  to  press  upon  the  masters  of  the  coun 
try  their  obligation,  as  Christian  men,  so  to  arrange  this  institution 
(slavery)  as  not  to  necessitate  the  violation  of  those  sacred  relations  which 
God  has  created,  and  which  man  cannot,  consistently  with  Christian 
duty,  annul.  The  systems  of  labor  which  prevail  in  Europe,  and  which 
are,  in  many  respects,  more  severe  than  ours,  are  so  arranged  as  to  pre 
vent  all  necessity  for  the  separation  of  parents  and  children,  and  of  husbands 
and  wives;  and  a  very  little  care  upon  our  part,  would  rid  THE  SYSTEM 

UPON    WHICH    WE   ARE    ABOUT   TO    PLANT    OUR   NATIONAL   LIFE,    of  these 

unchristian  features. 

CHRISTIAN  ASSOCIATION. 

The  Young  Men's  Christian  Association  of  New  Orleans, 
under  date  of  May  22,  1861,  issued  an  Address  "to  the 
Young  Men's  Christian  Associations  of  North  America," 
in  which  they  say,  in  their  Circular  Letter : 


182         RESPONSIBILITY    OF   THE   SOUTHERN    CHURCH. 

We  wish  you  to  feel  with  us,  that  there  is  a  terrible  responsibility 
now  resting  upon  us  all  as  Christians,  in  this  trying  time  of  our  coun 
ty  ^  *  *  *  -\fl-Q  jn  £he  gouth  are  satisfied  in  our  judgments,  AND 
IN  OUR  HEARTS  [their  own  capitals],  that  the  political  severance  of  the 
Southern  from  the  Northern  States  is  permanent,  and  SHOULD  BE  SATIS 
FACTORY.  We  believe  that  reason,  history,  and  knowledge  of  human 
nature,  will  suggest  the  folly  and  futility  of  a  war  to  re-establish  a  poli 
tical  union  between  the  severed  sections.  *  *  *  Has  it  not  occurred 
to  you,  brethren,  that  the  hand  of  God  MAY  BE  in  this  political  division, 
that  both  Governments  may  more  effectually  work  out  His  designs  in 
the  regeneration  of  the  world  ?  While  such  a  possibility  may  exist,  let 
His  people  be  careful  not  to  war  against  His  will.  It  is  not  pretended 
that  the  war  is  to  maintain  religious  freedom,  or  extend  the  kingdom  of 
Christ.  Then,  God's  people  should  beware  how  they  wage  or  encou 
rage  it.  In  the  name  of  Christ  and  His  divine  teachings,  we  protest 
against  the  war  which  the  Government  at  Washington  is  waging 
against  the  territory  and  people  of  the  Southern  States ;  and  we  call 
upon  all  the  Young  Men's  Christian  Associations,  in  the  North,  to  unite 
with  us  in  this  solemn  protest. 

THE    BAPTIST  CHURCH. 

The  Southern  Baptist  Convention,  a  body  representing 
"  a  constituency  of  six  or  seven  hundred  thousand  Chris 
tians,"  in  session  at  Savannah,  Georgia,  May  13,  1861, 
"  unanimously"  adopted  resolutions,  in  which  the  following 
sentences  are  found : 

In  view  of  such  premises,  this.  Convention  cannot  keep  silence. 
Recognizing  the  necessity  that  the  whole  moral  influence  of  the  people, 
in  whatever  capacity  or  organization,  should  be  enlisted  in  aid  of  the 
rulers,  who,  by  their  suffrages,  have  been  called  to  defend  the  endan 
gered  interests  of  person  and  property,  of  honor  and  liberty,  it  is 
bound  to  utter  its  voice  distinctly,  decidedly,  emphatically,  &c.  *  *  * 
Resolved,  That  we  most  cordially  approve  of  the  formation  of  the  Government 
of  the  Confederate  Status  of  America,  and  admire  and  applaud  the  nolle 
course  of  that  Gownment  up  to  the  present  time.  *  *  *  Eesolved, 
That  we  most  cordially  tender  to  the  President  of  the  Confederate  States, 
to  his  Cabinet,  and  to  the  members  of  the  Congress  now  convened  at 
Montgomery,  the  assurances  of  our  sympathy  and  entire  confidence. 


OTHER    CHURCHES.  183 

With  them  are  OUT  hearts,  and  our  hearty  co-operation.  *  *  *  Every 
principle  of  religion,  of  patriotism,  and  of  humanity,  calls  upon  us  to 
pledge  our  fortunes  and  lives  in  the  good  work.  *  *  *  Resolved, 
That  these  resolutions  be  communicated  to  the  Congress  of  the  Confed 
erate  States  at  Montgomery,  with  the  signatures  of  the  President  and 
Secretaries  of  the  Convention. 

METHODISTS,      BAPTISTS,      EPISCOPALIANS,     PRESBYTERIANS, 
LUTHERANS,  GERMAN  REFORMED,  AND  OTHER  CHURCHES. 

In  April,  1863,  all  the  leading  religious  bodies  of  the 
South,  as  above  named,  united  in  putting  forth  "  An 
Address  to  Christians  throughout  the  World,"  declar 
ing  the  causes  of  the  revolt,  and  intended  to  justify  their 
course  in  sustaining  the  rebellion  and  the  war  against  the 
Government  of  the  United  States.  The  Address  is  signed, 
on  behalf  of  these  various  branches  of  the  Church,  by 
ninety-six  ministers.  It  is  a  very  long  document,  going 
fully  into  the  religious  and  political  "  situation,"  and  takes 
substantially  the  same  views  as  are  found  in  the  extracts 
from  other  Addresses,  above  given. 

Among  other  things,  they  set  forth  that  "  the  war  is 
forced  upon  us — we  have  always  desired  peace  ;"  that  u  the 
Union  cannot  be  restored  ;"  that  the  "  Confederate  Govern 
ment  is  a  fixed  fact ;"  and,  assuming  that  the  President's 
Proclamation  of  freedom  to  the  slaves  was  designed  to 
provoke  an  insurrection,  and  that  it  would  result  in  "  the 
slaughter  of  tens  of  thousands  of  poor,  deluded  insurrec 
tionists,"  they  thus  speak  further  of  this  document,  and 
what  may  result  from  it : 

The  recent  Proclamation  of  the  President  of  the  United  States,  seek 
ing  the  emancipation  of  the  slaves  of  the  South,  is,  in  our  judgment,  a 
suitable  occasion  for  solemn  protest  on  the  part  of  the  people  of  God 
throughout  the  world.  *  *  *  Make  it  absolutely  necessary  for  the 
public  safety  that  the  slaves  be  slaughtered,  and  he  who  should  write 
the  history  of  that  event  would  record  the  darkest  chapter  of  human 
woe  yet  written. 


184         RESPONSIBILITY    OF    THE    SOUTHERN    CHURCH. 

They  argue  at  length  to  show  the  grounds  on  which  all 
Christians  in  the  world  should  unite  with  them  in  a  solemn 
protest  against  this  Proclamation,  and  yet,  like  other 
Southern  writers,  pretend  to  regard  it,  after  all,  but  a 
brutum  fidmen,  a  "  mere  political  document."  They 
heartily  approve  of  and  sustain  the  "  Confederate  Govern 
ment,"  and  the  war  it  is  prosecuting  against  the  lawful 
Government  of  the  United  States,  and  they  highly  com 
pliment  the  Christian  character  of  their  rulers,  generals, 
soldiers,  and  people ;  and,  in  a  word,  throw  the  whole 
power  of  the  Southern  Church,  in  all  its  denominations, 
into  the  scale  of  treason,  rebellion,  and  war. 

SOUTHERN    RELIGIOUS    PRESS    ON    THE    REBELLION. 

One  of  the  most  efficient  aids  of  the  rebellion,  early  and 
late,  has  been  the  religious  press  of  the  South,  conducted 
by  leading  clergymen.  We  have  given  long  citations  from 
Southern  quarterlies.  We  give  a  sample  of  the  weekly 
religious  press. 

AT    NEW    ORLEANS. 

The  New  Orleans  True  Witness,  long  before  the  Presi 
dential  election  in  November,  1860,  warned  its  readers  at 
the  North,  that,  in  case  of  Mr.  Lincoln's  election,  there 
would  be  great  trouble,  and  disunion  would  be  the  result. 
Immediately  upon  the  issue  being  joined  between  Union 
ists  and  Secessionists  in  New  Orleans,  soon  after  the  ela 
tion,  it  openly  espoused  the  rebel  fortunes,  and  from  that 
day  until  New  Orleans  surrendered  to  the  Union  arms,  it 
battled  heartily  in  the  cause.  A  single  paragraph  from  its 
issue  of  April  27,  1861,  upon  the  attack  made  upon  the 
Massachusetts  troops  in  Baltimore,  on  the  19th  of  that 
month,  will  serve  to  show  its  spirit,  and  the  means  used  by 
a  religious  journal  to  "  fire  the  Southern  heart." 


RELIGIOUS    PRESS    AT    COLUMBIA,    S.    C.  185 

Maryland  is  kindling  with  Southern  fire,  while  Baltimore  has  stood  at 
the  font  of  baptismal  blond,  in  solemn  covenant  for  the  Confederate  States ; 
and  Providence  ordered  that  this  thrilling  deed,  this  sealing  ordinance, 
should  be  on  the  anniversary  of  the  battle  of  Lexington,  Mass.,  the 
memorable  19th  of  April.  Thus  the  same  day  beheld  the  first  blood  of 
'76  and  of  '61 — fortunate  omen  of  the  result. 

The  editor  of  that  paper,  who  is  responsible  for  this 
transparent  blasphemy,  Rev.  Richmond  Mclnnis,  took  his 
seat,  in  May  following,  in  the  General  Assembly  of  the 
Presbyterian  Church,  which  met  in  Philadelphia,  and 
"  solemnly  protested"  against  the  terrible  defilement  of 
religion  with  politics,  because  the  Assembly  resolved  to 
stand  by  the  Government  which  he,  through  the  encour 
agement  thus  given  to  treason  and  rebellion,  was  using  all 
his  might  to  overthrow. 

AT    COLUMBIA,    SOUTH    CAROLINA. 

Another  specimen  of  the  Southern  religious  pi-ess  is  seen 
in  the  Southern  Presbyterian,  published  at  Columbia,  South 
Carolina.  We  of  course  do  not  look  for  any  thing  else 
from  that  quarter  but  treason.  Its  utterances,  however, 
do  not  outrage  the  solemn  ordinances  of  religion,  when 
commending  a  cowardly  attack  upon  the  country's  gallant 
defenders.  On  the  15th  of  December,  1860,  when  as  yet 
no  State  had  seceded,  it  thus  speaks  of  the  contemplated 
Convention  of  South  Carolina  : 

It  is  well  known  that  the  members  of  the  Convention  have  been 
elected  with  the  understanding  and  expectation  that  they  will  dissolve  the 
relations  of  South  Carolina  with  the  Federal  Union,  immediately  and 
unconditionally.  This  is  a  foregone  conclusion  in  South  Carolina.  It  is 
a  natter  for  devout  thankfulness,  that  the  Convention  will  embody  the 
very  highest  wisdom  and  character  of  the  State ;  private  gentlemen, 
judges  of  her  highest  legal  tribunals,  and  ministers  of  the  Gospel.  * 
Nothing,  at  present,  assumes  any  definite  shape,  except  the  resolve  in 
South  Carolina,  in  the  face  of  all  obloquy,  and  ridicule,  and  menaces,  of 
all  the  wrath  and  contempt  of  thoso  who  alternately  curse  and  jeer  her, 


186         RESPONSIBILITY    OF    THE    SOUTHERN    CHURCH. 

to  assert  her  independence.  Before  we  issue  another  number  of  this  paper 
the  deed  may  be  done — the  Union  may  be  dissolved — we  may  have 
ceased  to  be  in  the  United  States. 

Thus,  we  have  another  instance  in  which  the  religious 
press,  controlled  by  the  clergy,  went  ahead  of  any  acts  o 
the  civil  authority,  in  u  aiding  and  abetting"  the  rebellion. 
In  the  same  issue,  this  paper,  in  an  article  on  "  Be  not  de 
ceived,"  and  in  still  another,  in  reply  to  a  "  Boston  corre 
spondent,"  thus  speaks  of  the  cause  of  the  "  contest"  upon 
which  the  "  foregone  conclusion"  is  given  : 

We  entreat  our  readers  to  let  nothing  mislead  them  on  this  point. 
The  real  contest  now  in  hand  between  the  North  and  South,  is  for  the 
preservation  or  destruction  of  slavery.  *  *  *  We  ask  our  corre 
spondent,  we  ask  all  or  any  of  the  sober  men  of  the  North,  if  it  is  not 
the  almost  unanimous  resolution  of  the  Northern  people  to  forbid  THE 
EXTENSION  OF  SLAVERY  ?  We  believe  it  is ;  and  the  Southern  people,  for 
a  thousand  reasons,  must  regard  that  as  a  wrong  that  CANNOT  BE  SUB 
MITTED  TO. 

AT    RICHMOND,    VIRGINIA. 

The  Central  Presbyterian,  of  Richmond,  Virginia,  edited 
or  mainly  controlled  at  the  time  by  two  clergymen  of 
Northern  birth,  and  Pastors  of  large  Churches  in  Rich 
mond,  Dr.  Moore,  a  native  of  Pennsylvania,  and  Dr.  M.  D. 
Hoge,  a  native  of  Ohio,  in  connection  with  Rev.  Wm. 
Brown,  spoke  as  follows,  before  the  secession  of  Virginia, 
after  the  attack  upon  Fort  Sumter  : 

We  are  henceforth  a  divided  nation.  We  do  not  now  search  for  the 
causes,  or  the  place  of  blame.  The  stupendous  fact  is  before  us,  "like 
the  great  mountains"  of  God,  deep-rooted  and  high — plain  to  the  eye  of 
the  whole  world  and  immovable.  We  are  a  separate  people.  The 
answer  of  the  President  at  Washington  to  our  commissioners,  and  his 
proclamation  calling  for  an  armed  force  of  seventy-five  thousand  men  to 
"execute  the  laws," — that  is,  to  subjugate  the  seven  seceding  States, — 
is  an  end  of  the  matter.  Separation  is  unavoidable.  *  *  *  The 


RELIGIOUS    PRESS    AT    FAYETTEVILLE,    N.    C.  187 

position  of  Virginia,  so  far  as  the  act  of  her  Convention  can  fix  it,  will 
soon  be  known.  It  is  not  our  place  to  assume  any  thing  in  anticipation. 
*  *  *  Their  determination  will  be  such  as  may  give  reason  to 
every  member  of  our  Commonwealth  for  saying,  in  the  face  of  the 
world,  and  of  Heaven  itself,  "IT  is  RIGHT."  Its  support  will  then  be 
accepted  as  a  religious  trust. 

These  modest  gentlemen  say,  "  It  is  not  our  place  to 
assume  any  thing  in  anticipation  y"  and  yet  they  both  as 
sume  and  anticipate  a  large  amount  that  is  political,  for  a 
religious  journal.  They  openly  declare  for  separation  ; 
u  assume"  to  know,  "  in  anticipation,"  that  the  action  of 
the  Convention  will  be  "  right"  before  "  every"  Virginian, 
and  before  "  Heaven  itself;"  and  all  this,  when  the  Con 
vention  gave  the  people  of  the  State  some  forty  days  to 
think  upon  the  matter,  before  they  should  be  called  to  vote 
upon  the  Ordinance  of  Secession.  How  valiantly  these 
"  Northern  ministers  with  Southern  principles," — who 
have  constantly  protested  against  "  mixing  politics  and 
religion," — can  fight  with  religious  weapons  on  the  arena 
of  politics,  when  they  become  leaders  of  the  people,  and 
declare  their  will  forty  days  before  they  are  called  on  to 
express  it,  and  seal  it  u  in  anticipation"  with  the  signet  of 
"  Heaven !" 

AT    FAYETTEVILLE,    NORTH    CAROLINA. 

So,  also,  the  North  Carolina  Presbyterian,  with  no  more 
modesty  than  the  Virginian,  and  likewise  &e/brethat  State 
seceded,  while  disclaiming  to  "  assume,"  does  yet  declare, 
what  should  be  done,  as  follows : 

What,  then,  shall  North  Carolina  do?  Where  does  she  stand?  On 
which  side  ?  Without  assuming  to  speak  for  others,  though  we  doubt 
less  reflect  the  opinions  of  four-fifths  of  the  clergy  and  membership  of 
the  Southern  Presbyterian  Church,  we  say  that  the  South  should  unite  for 
the  sake  of  the  South — for  the  sake  of  peace,  humanity,  and  religion — of 
our  soil,  our  honor,  and  our  slaves;  and  that  ALL  THE  ST, \VT:  STAGES 
should  make  common  cause  in  this  hour  of  their  extremity. 


188         RESPONSIBILITY    OF    THE    SOUTHERN    CHURCH. 

And  so  it  was  with  the  conductors  of  the  religious  press 
all  over  the  South,  of  every  denomination  which  had  its 
organs.  They  were  among  the  early  champions  of  treason 
and  rebellion,  urging  resistance  to  the  Government  "  in 
anticipation"  of  Conventions  and  votes  of  the  people  ;  and 
thus  becoming  open  leaders,  and  u  assuming"  momentous 
responsibilities. 

EDUCATION    IN    AID    OF    THE    REBELLION. 

Another  item  in  illustration  of  our  subject,  relates  to  the 
efforts  in  behalf  of  Education  in  the  South,  on  a  footing 
which  should  secure  its  independence  of  Northern  Colleges 
and  Universities,  and  strike  out  a  curriculum  within  which 
should  be  safely  ensconced  all  the  interests  of  the  "  pecu 
liar  institution." 

The  world  is  familiar  with  the  fact,  that  for  many  years 
the  South  has  attempted  to  provide  itself  with  an  expur 
gated  literature ;  that  nothing  in  the  shape  of  books  and 
periodicals,  from  the  North  or  from  across  the  Atlantic, 
suited  its  tastes  ;  that  nothing  of  this  sort  was  deemed 
"  safe"  or  "  sound,"  from  a  Child's  Primer  up  to  a  work 
on  Moral  Philosophy ;  and  as  for  teachers  of  both  sexes, 
for  whom  it  was  largely  dependent  on  the  North,  and  most 
commonly  upon  New  England,  they  could  "not  be  borne 
with  much  longer,  even  though  Southern  children  should 
have  to  grow  up  in  ignorance."  Their  progress  in  this 
direction  was  small,  though  of  late  years  something  was 
accomplished.  As  they  supposed  the  time  nearly  ripe  for 
national  disruption,  a  stimulus  was  given  to  their  efforts. 

We  aim  here  only  to  notice  one  recent  movement  of  a 
different  kind.  The  South  has  been  constantly  increasing 
the  number  of  its  Colleges,  and  some  of  them  are  of  a  high 
character.  But  since  the  Presidential  election  of  1856,  ji 
hold  scheme  for  a  Southern  University  of  magnificent  pro- 


GREAT    SOUTHERN    UNIVERSITY.  189 

portions  was  projected,  which  is  worthy  of  a  passing  con 
sideration.  Its  design  will  be  seen  to  have  been  to  "  con 
serve  and  perpetuate"  the  educational  interests  of  the  South 
in  behalf  of  Slavery. 

GREAT    SOUTHERN    UNIVERSITY. 

The  plan  is  developed  in  De  Boic's  Review,  a  monthly, 
issued  in  New  Orleans,  which  has  been  a  leading  organ 
of  disunion,  and  one  of  the  stoutest  champions  for  per 
petual  slavery.  The  project  is  treated  in  several  numbers, 
and  seems  to  have  occupied  the  attention  of  leading  minds 
in  Church  and  State  for  several  years.  In  the  number 
for  November,  1857,  is  one  of  a  series  of  articles  advo 
cating  the  plan,  written  by  a  gentleman  of  Georgia.  It 
is  entitled,  "  Central  Southern  University :  Political  and 
Educational  Necessity  for  its  Establishment."  The  editor 
prefaces  the  article,  representing  the  author  as  saying : 

That  the  Southern  people,  through  individual,  municipal,  and  State 
action,  comprising  all  denominations,  orthodox  and  heterodox,  Jew  and 
Gentile,  should  move  with  one  accord  to  secure,  for  OUT  political  as  well 
as  intellectual  redemption  and  development,  at  some  advantageous  point, 
a  vast  Central  University,  towards  which  should  radiate,  to  be  after 
wards  condensed,  intensified,  and  reflected,  the  emanations  of  our 
municipal  and  State  Schools,  Academies,  and  Colleges. 

DISUNION. FIGHTING    MEN   TO    BE   EDUCATED. 

The  article  presents  the  subject  in  four  parts.  The  fol 
lowing  sentences  are  taken  from  the  first,  illustrating  the 
"  necessity"  for  such  an  institution,  and  the  grounds  on 
which  it  rests : 

The  opinion  that  it  is  vitally  important  to  the  interests  and  general 
welfare  of  the  South,  for  the  slaveholding  States  to  endow  and  organize 
as  speedily  as  possible  a  great  Central  Southern  University,  seems  to 
be  rapidly  gaining  ground.  *  *  *  That  there  does  exist  a  political 
necessity  for  the  establishment  of  an  institution  of  learning-  of  tho 


190         RESPONSIBILITY    OF    THE    SOUTHERN    CHUECH. 

character  alluded  to,  an  institution  around  which  shall  cluster  the 
hopes  and  the  pride  of  the  South,  the  teachings  of  which  shall  be  thoroughly 
Southern,  one  pledged  to  the  defence  and  perpetuation  of  that  form  of 
civilization  peculiar  to  the  slaveJiolding  States,  will  not,  perhaps,  be  ques 
tioned,  although  some  may  entertain  doubts  as  to  the  pressure  of  that 
necessity.  *  *  *  The  difficulty  between  the  South  and  the  North 
can  never  arrive  at  a  peaceable  settlement.  The  supreme  and  ultimate 
arbiter  in  the  dispute  now  pending  between  them,  MUST  BE  THE  SWORD. 
To  that  complexion  it  must  come  at  last.  The  first  step  then  which  the 
South  should  take  in  preparing  for  the  great  contest  ahead  of  her,  is  to 
secure  harmony  at  home.  *  *  *  The  safety  of  the  South,  the 
integrity  of  the  South,  not  the  permanence  of  the  Union,  should  be  re 
garded  as  the  "paramount  political  good."  No  true  Southerner,  no 
loyal  son  of  the  South,  can  possibly  desire  the  continuance  of  the  Union 
as  it  is.  *  *  *  The  University  of  Virginia  is  not  sufficiently  Southern, 
sufficiently  central,  sufficiently  cottonized.  to  become  the  great  educa 
tional  centre  of  the  South.  *  *  *  According  to  the  census  of  1850, 
the  number  of  white  inhabitants  of  the  Southern  States  is  6,113,308. 
The  number  of  fighting  men  is  usually  estimated  at  about  one-fifth  of 
the  population.  That  gives  1,222,661  fighting  men.  Of  these,  at  least 
one-fourth  are  of  an  age  suitable  for  going  to  College.  *  *  *  The 
establishment  of  the  University  has  been  proposed  as  a  measure  certain 
to  produce,  by  its  working,  unity  and  concord  of  action  on  the  part  of 
the  slaveholding  States.  The  young  men  of  the  South  will  then 
assemble  and  drink  pure  and  invigorating  draughts  from  unpolluted 
fountains.  They  will  meet  together  as  brethren,  and  be  educated  in 
one  common  political  faith,  at  one  common  alma  mater. 

The  writer  urges,  in  this  article,  the  necessity  of  action, 
on  the  further  ground  that  "  each  of  two  denominations 
of  Christians  at  the  South  proposes  to  establish  a  Central 
Southern  University," — the  Methodist  Episcopal  South, 
and  the  Protestant  Episcopal, — for  the  same  general  ends, 
of  promoting  the  special  interests  of  the  South ;  arid  lie 
thinks  other  denominations  may  follow  suit,  and  hence  the 
system  may  lack  the  power  which  one  institution  of  his 
type  would  have  for  making  "  thorough  Southerners." 
In  this  same  number  of  De  Bow,  is  found  a  brief  notice 


PROFESSORSHIP    ON    PATRIOTISM.  191 

of  a  pamphlet  issued  by  the  Bishops  of  the  Episcopal 
Church  at  the  South,  exhibiting  a  plan  for  a  "  Southern 
Episcopal  University ;"  one  of  the  cases  referred  to. 
This  institution  was  not  to  go  into  operation  until 
$500,000  had  been  subscribed.  The  agreement  entered 
into  by  the  Southern  Bishops  and  several  distinguished 
laymen,  all  of  whose  names  are  given  in  Do  Bow,  was 
44  signed  at  Lookout  Mountain,  near  Chattanooga,  Ten 
nessee,  the  sixth  day  of  July,  A.  D.  1857.'1 

ENDOWMENT,    FIVE    OR    TEN    MILLIONS. 

In  the  number  of  De  Bow  for  December,  1857,  the 
Georgian  further  develops  his  plan  for  a  great  "  Central 
Southern  University,"  from  which  we  learn  something  of 
its  grand  proportions : 

A  total,  then,  of  five  millions  is  supposed  to  be  sufficient,  both  to 
establish  the  University,  and  to  endow  it  in  perpetuity.  This  is  not  a 
very  large  sum ;  and  even  should  it  be  advisable  or  necessary  to  double 
the  amount,  and  make  it  ten  millions,  that  would  be  a  very  small  sum 
to  be  paid  by  fourteen  sovereign  States,  for  the  innumerable  blessings 
and  advantages  which  are  sure  to  result  from  it.  *  *  *  The 
method  which  I  suggest  for  raising  the  five  millions  of  dollars,  is  to 
levy  a  tax  on  population,  a  tax  on  area,  and  a  tax  on  property. 

PROFESSORSHIP    ON   PATRIOTISM. 

The  writer  then  presents  at  length  his  programme  for 
"  professorships,"  of  which  he  proposes  forty-three,  num 
bered  in  order.  The  eighth  is  devoted  to  "Patriotism," 
on  which  the  writer  thus  descants : 

The  duty  of  the  incumbent  of  this  professorship  should  be,  to  instil 
into  the  minds  and  hearts  of  his  pupils  a  pure  and  undivided  love  of 
country;  to  vindicate  the  domestic  institutions  of  the  South;  and  to  hold 
them  up  as  worthy  of  their  hearty  support,  their  love  and  admiration.  He 
should  be  a  man  of  commanding  presence,  of  fervid  eloquence,  of  un 
doubted  integrity,  of  extensive  erudition,  great  in  historic  lore,  A 
THOROUGH  SOUTHERNER. 


192          RESPONSIBILITY    OF    THE    SOUTHERN    CHURCH. 


EPISCOPAL    UNIVERSITY    OF    THE    SOUTH. 

In  the  May  number  of  De  Bow's  Review  for  1859,  we 
find  the  "Address  of  the  Commissioners  to  the  people  of 
the  Southern  States,"  in  behalf  of  the  Episcopal  University 
before  spoken  of,  which  had  now  taken  the  name  of  "The 
University  of  the  South."  This  Address  is  dated,  "New 
Orleans,  February  24,  1859."  These  Commissioners  are 
Leonidas  Polk  and  Stephen  Elliott,  Bishops  respectively 
of  the  Dioceses  of  Louisiana  and  Georgia,  by  whom,  on 
behalf  of  the  other  Bishops  and  the  Trustees,  the  Address 
is  signed.  They  set  forth  the  plans  of  the  institution. 
It  is  to  subserve  the  interests  of  slavery  and  Southern 
independence.  They  speak  of  their  resources  and  propects 
thus:  "Nine  thousand  acres  of  land  have  been  given  us 
by  the  Sewanee  Coal  Company,  and  by  the  citizens  of 
Franklin  county,  Tennessee."  u  We  have  bound  our 
selves  not  to  take  a  single  step,  until  we  have  received 
obligations  to  the  amount  of  $500,000,  bearing  interest,  as 
the  lowest  point  at  which  we  should  commence."  They 
also  say  that  "one  million  of  dollars  is  much  less  than  we 
hope  to  raise,"  and  that  this  sum  "  should  be  subscribed 
for  its  endowment."  They  say  further  :  "  Thirty  persons 
have  given  us,  within  a  few  weeks,  over  $200,000."  At 
length,  the  minimum,  $500,000,  having  been  secured,  their 
location  was  chosen  on  one  of  those  lofty  mountains  near 
Chattanooga,  where  the  corner-stone  was  laid,  with  great 
pomp  and  ceremony,  in  the  presence  of  the  Bishops  and  a 
great  multitude. 

But  alas !  for  all  human  calculations !  Before  the  in 
stitution  had  accomplished  its  great  mission  of  instructing 
the  young  men  of  the  South  in  the  peculiar  notions  of 
"  Patriotism"  developed  in  that  projected  "  professorship," 
and  before  even  the  main  building  had  risen  on  that  ample 


MAJOR-GENERAL    HILL    AS    AX    EDUCATOR.  193 

corner-stone,  lessons  of  genuine  patriotism  were  taught  on 
tl:;it  very  spot.  The  Union  army  of  the  Cumberland, 
tinder  Rosecrans,  there  fought  and  won  a  battle  for 
liberty,  enriching  with  the  best  blood  of  an  heroic  soldiery 
the  soil  consecrated  with  religions  rites,  to  slavery.  The 
soldiers  occupied  for  barracks  the  surrounding  buildings, 
and  that  corner-stone  was  blown  to  fragments  by  Union 
powder,  no  more  to  be  an  "  aid  and  comfort"  to  treason. 
We  sincerely  trust,  that,  by  the  grace  of  God,  the  armies 
of  Union  and  of  Liberty  may  shiver  to  atoms,  with  equal 
ease,  in  His  own  good  time,  that  other  "corner-stone"  on 
Avrhich  the  rebel  Vice-President  boasts  that  the  rebel 
"  nation"  is  built. 

These  were  some  of  the  schemes, — in  actual  operation 
an<3  projected, — by  which  all  the  appliances  of  Education, 
in  its  highest  grades  and  most  systematic  and  enlarged 
plans,  were  to  aid  the  press,  the  pulpit,  and  the  politicians, 
in  training  up  a  race  of  "  Southrons"  to  regard  human 
slavery  as  "  worthy  of  their  hearty  support,  their  love  and 
admiration,'1  under  the  name  of  "  PATRIOTISM,"  while  they 
should  be  taught  to  give  other  illustrations  of  that  virtue 
by  preparing  to  attack  and  plotting  to  overthrow  that 
Government  which  had  never  wronged  them,  which  the 
South  had  most  commonly  controlled,  and  whose  founda 
tions  were  laid  in  the  blood  of  patriots  of  all  sections  of 
the  Union. 

REBEL    MAJOR-GENERAL    HILL    AS    AN    EDUCATOR. 

As  a  fitting  conclusion  to  our  notice  of  the  schemes  for 
"  peculiar"  education  at  the  South  to  foster  the  "  peculiar 
institution,"  we  present  Major-General  D.  H.  Hill,  of  the 
rebel  army,  in  the  character  of  an  educator.  He  is  an 
Elder  in  the  Presbyterian  Church,  and  was  a  member  of 
its  General  Assembly  which  met  at  Indianapolis,  Indiana, 


194         RESPONSIBILITY    OF    THE    SOUTHERN    CHURCH. 

in  May,  1859.  He  is  a  native  of  South  Carolina,  was 
educated  for  the  army  at  West  Point,  fought  under  Gen 
eral  Scott  in  the  Mexican  War,  ;md  rose  to  the  rank  of 
Major.  He  resigned  his  commission  and  entered  on  the 
duties  of  civil  life;  first,  becoming  a  Professor  of  Mathe 
matics  in  Davidson  College,  North  Carolina,  and  after 
wards,  in  1859,  taking  the  office  of  Principal  of  the 
North  Carolina  Military  Institute,  at  Charlotte.  In  this 
post,  if  we  are  rightly  informed,  he  remained  until  the 
occurrence  of  the  rebellion,  into  which  he  threw  his  whole 
soul,  and  finally  rose  to  the  rank  of  Major-General. 

HIS    HATRED    OF    THE    NORTH. 

A  writer  who  appears  to  understand  and  appreciate  his 
character,  thus  speaks  of  him  : 

General  Hill  is  a  South  Carolinian  in  all  his  feelings,  principles,  and 
prejudices,  and  doubtless  rejoices  that  he  is  such.  He  has  nursed  his 
hatred  to  the  North  to  such  a  degree,  that  it  has  become  as  near  to  a 
passion  as  his  cold  nature  permits.  In  the  year  1860,  he  delivered  a 
lecture  at  several  places  in  North  Carolina,  in  which  he  complained 
bitterly  of  the  injustice  which  had  been  done  to  the  South  by  the  North 
ern  historians  of  the  Revolutionary  War;  and  in  which  he  asserted,  in 
substance,  that  all  the  battles  gained  in  the  Revolution  by  Northern 
troops  were  a  series  of  "Yankee  tricks,"  and  that  the  real,  hard,  open 
fighting  had  been  done  by  the  South.  So  inveterate  is  this  enmity 
to  Northern  men  and  the  Northern  character  in  General  Hill,  that  it 
crops  out  in  unexpected  places,  and  in  most  remarkable  ways. 

SECESSION   TAUGHT    BY    ALGEBRA. 

This  writer  goes  on  to  declare  of  General  Hill  that 
which  reveals  the  ingenuity  of  his  intellect,  the  bitterness 
of  his  heart,  arid  his  zeal  as  an  educator,  in  training  up 
the  young  at  the  South  to  hate  the  Northern  people,  and 
preparing  them  for  the  work  of  rebellion  in  which  they  are 
now  engaged.  He  thus  continues  : 


SPECIMEN    OF    ALGEBRAIC    PROBLEMS.  195 

It  would  pu/.zle  the  ingenuity  of  most  men  to  import  sectional  feel 
ings  and  prejudices  into  the- neutral  region  of  pure  mathematics ;  but 
General  Hill  has  succeeded  in  conveying  covert  sneers  by  algebraical 
symbols,  and  insinuating  disparagement  through  mathematical  prob 
lems.  In  1857  he  published  a  text-book,  called  the  "  Elements  of 
Algebra,"  of  which  Thomas  Jonathan  Jackson  (the  famous  Rebel  Gen 
eral,  "  Stonewall,"  another  Elder  in  the  Presbyterian  Church),  then 
Professor  of  Natural  and  Experimental  Philosophy  in  the  Virginia  Mili 
tary  Institute,  said,  in  a  formal  recommendation,  that  he  regarded  it  as 
"  superior  to  any  other  work  with  which  I  am  acquainted  on  the  same 
branch  of  science.'' 

SPECIMEN    OF    ALGEBRAIC    PROBLEMS. 

Here  are  a  few  examples  of  the  manner  in  which  Gen 
eral  Hill  taught  "  the  young  idea  how  to  shoot,"  of  which 
the  present  rebellion  furnishes  the  best  illustration  that 
his  teaching  was  not  in  vain  : 

A  Yankee  mixes  a  certain  number  of  wooden  nutmegs,  which  cost 
him  one-fourth  of  a  cent  apiece,  with  real  nutmegs  worth  four  cents 
apiece,  and  sells  the  whole  assortment  for  $44,  and  gains  $3  75  by  the 
fraud.  How  many  wooden  nutmegs  were  there?  Again:  At  the  Wo 
man's  Rights  Convention,  held  at  Syracuse,  New  York,  composed  of 
150  delegates,  the  old  maids,  childless  wives,  and  bedlamites,  were  to 
each  other  as  the  numbers,  5,  7,  and  3.  How  many  were  there  of  each 
class  ?  Again :  A  gentleman  in  Richmond  expressed  a  willingness  to 
liberate  his  slave,  valued  at  $1,000,  upon  the  receipt  of  that  sum  from 
charitable  persons.  He  received  contributions  from  twenty-four  per 
sons,  and  of  these  there  were  fourteen-nineteenths  the  fewer  from  the 
North  than  from  the  South,  and  the  average  donation  of  the  former 
was  four-fifths  the  smaller  than  that  of  the  latter.  What  was  the 
entire  amount  given  by  the  latter?  Again:  The  year  in  which  the 
Governors  of  Massachusetts  and  Connecticut  sent  treasonable  messages 
to  their  respective  Legislatures  is  expressed  by  4  digits.  The  square 
root  of  the  sum  of  the  first  and  second  is  equal  to  3  ;  the  square 
root  of  the  product  of  the  second  and  fourth,  is  equal  to  4;  the  first  is 
equal  to  the  third,  and  is  one-half  of  the  fourth.  Required  the  year. 
Again:  The  field  of  battle  at  Buena  Vista  is  six  and  a  half  miles  from 
Saltillo.  Two  Indiana  volunteers  ran  away  from  the  field  of  battle  at 
the  same  time;  one  ran  half  a  mile  per  hour  faster  than  the  other, 


196          RESPONSIBILITY    OF    THE    SOUTHERN    CHURCH. 

and  reached  Saltillo  five  minutes  and  fifty-four  and  six-elevenths  seconds 
sooner  than  the  other.     Required,  their  respective  rates  of  travel. 

Who  does  not  perceive  that  treason  and  rebellion,  and 
hatred  and  contempt  for  the  North,  would  inevitably  re 
sult  from  such  appliances  of  education,  under  the  direction 
of  leading  religious  men  ?  They  set  themselves  soberly 
at  work  to  prepare  for  this  horrid  business,  and  were 
training  the  young  of  both  sexes  for  it,  with  a  zeal  and 
ingenuity  which  were  truly  Satanic.* 

AID    OF   THE    CHURCH    INDISPENSABLE    TO    THE    REBELLION. 

We  have  now  given  sufficient  proof, — to  which,  indeed, 
much  more  might  be  added, — to  show  that  THE  SOUTHERN 
CHURCH,  through  its  leaders,  has  a  very  large  share  of  re 
sponsibility  to  shoulder  for  stirring  up  in  the  beginning, 
and  for  urging  on  with  zeal  and  energy  through  every 
stage  of  its  progress,  the  fiendish  work  of  treason  and  re 
bellion,  and  in  all  possible  modes  of  action  which  the  case 
admitted  ;  in  the  pulpit  and  through  the  press,  writing  for 
it,  preaching  for  it,  praying  for  it,  and  lighting  for  it;  be 
coming  leaders  in  all  this  work,  entering  upon  it  earliest, 
and  drawing  the  better  and  more  influential  classes  of 
society  along  with  them. 

*  Here  is  an  example  of  what  was  in  progress  at  the  South  to  instil  the  same 
spirit  into  the  female  mind  of  its  leading  families.  The  following  is  from  an  adver 
tisement  of  the  widely-known  Nashville  Female  Academy,  under  the  Kev.  0.  D. 
Elliott,  of  the  Methodist  Episcopal  Church,  who  is  a  native  of  Hamilton,  Ohio : 
"  TEACHERS.— We  employ  a  full  Faculty  of  Teachers  in  all  departments.  This  we 
can  do  safely,  since  our  teachers,  being  Southern,  arc  willing  to  invest  their  labor  in 
the  cause  of  the  South,  and  to  receive  pay  according  to  the  number  of  pupils  pre 
sent.  The  Academy  will  continue  to  wage  war, — uncompromising  and  unrelenting* 
— against  all  Yankee  teachers,  teachings,  tricks,  isms  and  ideas.  We  hope,  in  one 
more  year,  to  be  able  to  say  that  we  do  not  use  a  single  book  written  or  published. 
North  of  Mason  and  Dixon's  line."  In  regard  to  Kev.  Mr.  Elliott,  the  Principal,  a 
Nashville  writer  says:  "With  most  indefatigable  industry  he  has  labored  to  fill  the 
tender  hearts  of  little  girls  with  hatred  of  Northerners,  telling  them  in  precept 
upon  precept,  here  a  little  and  there  a  little,  that  the  Yankees  were  thirsty  for 
blood." 


CHURCH    AID    ACKNOWLEDGED    BY    STATESMEN.         197 

There  is  the  clearest  testimony  to  show  that  Southern 
statesmen  deemed  this  aid  of  the  clergy  invaluable,  indeed 
ESSENTIAL,  going  so  far  as  to  say  that  were  it  not  for  the 
clergy  leading  on  the  Church,  politicians  could  not  have 
succeeded  in  arousing  the  masses  of  the  people,  could  not 
have  made  a  successful  beginning  in  the  work.  We  have 
already  instanced  the  failure  of  Mr.  Toombs  in  the  charac 
ter  of  a  missionary,  and  the  aid  rendered  him  by  Dr. 
Palmer.  An  item  of  evidence  on  this  point,  which  is  broad 
in  its  application,  may  be  obtained  from  a  single  source. 

THIS    AID    ACKNOWLEDGED    BY    STATESMEN. 

In  the  Southern  Presbyterian,  under  date  of  April  20, 
1861,  the  indispensable  aid  rendered  by  the  Southern 
Church  and  clergy  is  argued.  A  communication  appears 
from  Macon,  Georgia,  entitled  "  The  Church  and  the  Con 
federate  States  of  America."  The  editor  introduces  the 
writer  to  his  readers  thus  :  "Many  of  them  will  recognize 
it  as  written  by  a  gentleman  occupying  a  high  civil  posi 
tion  in  the  Confederacy,  and  an  Elder  in  the  Presbyterian 
Church."  This  high  civilian  and  Elder  is  supposed  to  be 
Thomas  R.  R.  Cobb,  a  General  in  the  rebel  army  after 
wards,  who  was  killed  in  battle  near  Fredericksburg, 
Virginia,  in  December,  1862.  In  this  article,  he  says  : 

This  revolution  has  been  accomplished  MAINLY  BY  THE  CHURCHES 
I  do  not  undervalue  the  name,  and  position,  and  ability  of  politicians; 
still  I  am  sure  that  our  success  is  chiefly  attributable  to  the  support 
which  they  derived  from  the  co-operation  of  the  moral  sentiment  of  the 
country.  Without  that,  embodying,  as  it  obviously  did,  the  will  of  God, 
the  enterprise  would  have  been  A  FAILURE.  As  a  mere  fact,  it  is  already 
historical,  that  the  Christian  community  sustained  it  with  remarkable  unani 
mity.  *  *  *  In  times  like  these  upon  which  we  have  fallen,  the 
opinion  of  the  Church  upon  political  questions,  when  unanimously  and 
freely  declared,  is  far  more  potent  than  the  tricks  of  the  demagogue, 
or  the  eloquence  of  the  renowned  orator,  or  the  oracular  instructions  of 


198         RESPONSIBILITY    OF    THE    SOUTHERN    CHURCH. 

the  retired  sage.  The  reason  is,  that  our  Church,  being  sound,  has  the 
confidence  of  the  irreligious  world  Let  the  Church  know  this,  and 
realize  her  strength.  She  should  not  now  abandon  HER  OWN  GRAND 
CREATION.  She  should  not  leave  the  creature  of  her  prayers  and  labors 
to  the  contingencies  of  the  times,  or  the  tender  mercies  of  less  con 
scientious  patriots.  She  should  CONSUMMATE  what  she  has  BEGUN. 

A  STATESMAN'S  VIEW  INDORSED. 

Upon  the  position  and  influence  of  the  Southern  Church 
in  aid  of  the  rebel  cause,  as  set  forth  in  the  foregoing 
article,  the  editor,  Rev.  A.  A.  Porter,  writes  his  indorse 
ment,  as  follows  : 

We  have  no  fears  but  that  the  Christian  people  of  the  land  will  prove 
faithful  to  their  country,  in  this  day  of  trial,  to  the  very  last.  As  our 
correspondent  suggests,  thi-s  prevent  revolution  is  the  result  of  their  up 
rising.  Much  as  is  due  to  many  of  our  sagacious  and  gifted  politicians, 
they  could  effect  nothing  until  the  religious  union  of  the  Xorth  and  South 
was  dissolved,  nor  until  they  received  the  moral  support  and  co-operation 
of  Southern  Christians. 

This  is  quite  to  the  point.  The  men  who  write  thus, — 
one  an  Elder  of  the  Presbyterian  Church,  holding  a  high 
office  in  the  Rehel  Government,  and  the  other  a  minister, 
and  an  editor  on  the  mount  of  observation, — know  whereof 
they  affirm.  The  status  of  the  Southern  Church  and  clergy 
is  fixed,  and  it  is  acknowledged  by  their  leading  politicians ; 
and  their  testimony  is,  that,  without  the  early  influence 
and  powerful  moral  co-operation  of  the  Church  with  the 
leading  politicians,  the  work  of  treason  and  foul  rebellion 
"would  have  been  a  FAILURE."  The  Southern  Church 
may  thus  look  upon  "  HER  OWN  GRAND  CREATION."  As 
they  glory  in  what  they  have  done,  we  leave  them  to  enjoy 
the  spectacle. 

It  is  perceived  from  this,  that  the  charge  which  we 
bring  against  the  Southern  Church,  of  being  chiefly  respon 
sible  for  the  rebellion,  is  not  a  Northern  fabrication. 


THE    CHURCH    LED   THE   POLITICIANS.  199 


THE    CHURCH  "LED   THE    POLITICIANS. 

An  important  fact  in  an  earlier  number  of  the  Southern 
Presbyterian,  February  23,  1861,  is  stated  in  an  article  on 
"Northern  Misconception,"  as  follows  : 

They  (the  Northern  people)  persist  in  believing  this  universal  up 
heaving,  this  unanimous  and  determined  protest,  is  a  mere  matter  of 
politics,  the  movement  of  a  few  hot-headed  and  ambitious  men ;  where 
as,  nothing  is  so  well  known  among  us  as  that  the  people  have  driven,  not 
been  led  by,  the  politicians;  and  by  their  own  calm,  great  voice,  have 
pressed  them  on  to  carry  out  their  will. 

Admitting  the  correctness  of  this,  then,  who  have 
"driven"  or  "led"  the  people?  The  people  never  act 
without  leaders;  the  case  never  was  known,  since  time 
began,  in  a  revolution,  religious  or  political,  or  any 
other  great  movement ;  not  even  in  a  mob.  The  people 
always  have  leaders.  If  they  were  not  "led"  by  the 
"politicians,"  no  doubt  they  had  the  clergy  for  their  lead 
ers  or  "  drivers."  Their  own  statesmen  so  declare.  We 
are  willing  to  leave  it  there. 

This  view  of  the  case  is  still  further  insisted  on,  and  the 
opposite  view  resented  as  an  insult,  in  an  article  in  the 
same  paper,  of  March  16,  1861.  In  replying  to  a  Northern 
paper,  the  editor  says  : 

Will  he  still  refuse  to  believe  that  the  Churches  of  all  denominations  and 
the  State  are  AT  ONE  on  the  questions  involved?  that,  as  Christian 
citizens,  THE  WHOLE  HEART  of  ministers  and  people  is  in  this  matter  ? 
*  *  *  And  for  the  Churches  of  the  whole  South,  of  every  denomina 
tion,  we  indignantly  deny  that  they  have  been,  are  now,  or  ever  will  be, 
"the  humble  and  obedient  servants  of  politicians."  No  honest  man,  who 
knows  any  thing  of  Southern  Churches,  will  assert  it  of  them.  It  is 
utterly  false.  He  finds  "ministers  of  the  South  urging  political  men  to 
uncompromising  resistance."  Just  now  it  was  politicians  leading  min 
isters!  Yes!  And  so  long  as  we  have  tongue  or  pen  to  use,  will  we 
urge,  as  a  duty  to  God  and  man,  resistance  to  this  unholy  crusade  against 
what  we  believe  God's  truth,  right,  duty,  honor,  and  interest. 


200         RESPONSIBILITY    OF    THE    SOUTHERN    CHURCH. 


THE    PROOF    CONCLUSIVE. 

Thus  it  appears  that  this  influential  religious  journal, 
located  at  the  capital  of  South  Carolina,  doth  "  indignantly 
deny"  the  charge,  as  a  gross  slander  upon  their  character, 
that  the  clergy  of  the  South  were  the  "  servants  of  politi 
cians"  in  the  cause  of  rebellion;  and  it  denies  this,  further 
more,  "for  the  Churches  of  the  whole  South,  of  every 
denomination ;"  and  it  undoubtedly  is  well  qualified  to 
make  the  denial,  from  its  ample  knowledge  in  the  premises. 
But  when  the  counter-charge  is  made,  that  the  clergy  led 
the  politicians,  "  urging  political  men  to  uncompromising 
resistance"  to  the  United  States  Government,  it  does  not 
deny  the  soft  impeachment ;  but  it  says,  "Yes!" — we  did 
do  it — "  arid  so  long  as  we  have  tongue  or  pen  to  use,"  we 
will  continue  the  good  work ! 

Well, — we  must  leave  it  so.  If  they  make  up  such  a 
record  for  themselves,  and  if  the  politicians  in  the  highest 
places  in  the  "Confederate  Government"  agree  to  it,  as 
we  have  seen  they  do,  then  the  clergy  of  the  South,  "  of 
every  denomination,"  have  a  most  fearful  responsibility 
upon  them  for  the  horrors  of  this  rebellion  ;  a  responsibility 
claimed,  gloried  in,  and  of  Avhich  they  are  so  jealous  that 
they  will  not  divide  it  with  politicians.  Be  it  so ;  and  let 
God  reward  them  "according  to  their  works." 

This,  be  it  observed,  was  the  language  used  a  month 
before  the  crisis  brought  on  by  the  attack  on  Fort  Sumter. 

There  can  be  no  doubt  that  nothing  beyond  the  simple 
truth  is  stated  in  the  foregoing  extracts.  It  would  have 
been  impossible  for  the  political  demagogues  of  the  rebel 
States  to  carry  the  people  with  them  into  rebellion,  had 
not  THE  CHURCH,  at  the  earliest  moment,  under  her  leaders, 
given  to  it  of  "  her  strength  ;"  and  even  after  the  work  had 
been  thus  begun,  "the  enterprise  would  have  been  a  fail- 


LOYAL  CLERGYMEN  IN  THE  BORDER  STATES.    201 

ure,"  and  that  soon,  had  not  the  Church  stood  by  the  ob 
ject  of  "  her  own  grand  creation." 

The  power,  and  of  consequence  the  responsibility,  of  the 
Church  of  the  South  in  aid  of  the  rebellion,  may  be  illus 
trated  by  contrast,  and  that  in  two  respects ;  by  mention 
ing  what  is  well  known  concerning  an  early  period  of  the 
strife  in  some  of  the  loyal  Border  States,  and  by  noting 
the  action  of  the  larger  religious  bodies  all  orer  the  loyal 
States. 

LOYAL    CLERGYMEN    IN   THE    BORDER    STATES. 

As  illustrating  the  first  point,  take  the  case  of  Kentucky. 
What  would  have  been  its  condition  had  all  its  leading 

O 

clergymen,  as  in  the  rebel  States,  taken  open  ground  for 
the  rebellion  at  the  beginning  of  the  contest?  Does  any 
one  suppose,  in  such  case,  that  the  State  would  not  have 
been  carried  into  secession,  so  far  as  the  action  of  its  own 
people  is  concerned  ?  On  the  other  hand,  take  the  case  as 
it  is.  Does  any  one  doubt  that  leading  clergymen  of  the 
State,  taking  open  and  public  ground  for  the  Union, 
through  the  press  and  in  other  ways,  at  the  earliest  and 
most  critical  period,  contributed  most  essentially  to  form 
the  public  sentiment  of  the  more  influential  classes  of  the 
people,  to  preserve  the  State  to  the  Union,  and  to  save  its 
fair  fields  irom  becoming,  far  more  than  they  have  been,  the 
scene  of  the  most  bloody  and  suicidal  carnage  ? 

It  is  stating  no  more  than  what  is  believed  throughout 
the  country,  as  we  have  often  heard  expressed,  that,  in 
addition  to  the  valuable  aid  rendered  by  others,  Kentucky's 
adherence  to  the  Union  is  due  to  the  influence  of  Dr. 
Robert  J.  Breckinridge  more  than  to  that  of  any  other 
man  in  the  State ;  and  we  only  repeat  what  we  have  many 
times  heard  stated  by  citizens  of  Kentucky,  that  had  he 
taken  the  course  of  the  Thornwells  and  Palmers  of  the 


202         RESPONSIBILITY    OF   THE    SOUTHERN    CHURCH. 

South  at  that  early  day,  the  power  he  would  have  wielded 
in  the  Church  and  among  xthe  leading  politicians  of  the 
State  would  have  carried  Kentucky  out  by  an  act  of 
secession,  and  thus  have  made  her  territory  the  great  early 
battle-ground  of  the  West.  We  quite  as  confidently  be 
lieve,  that,  had  the  distinguished  ministers  of  the  South 
taken  a  determined  stand  against  secession,  they  would 
have  been  equally  successful.  It  is  but  stating  what  their 
own  politicians  declare.* 

LOYALTY  OF  NORTHERN  CHURCHES. THEIR  DUTY. 

The  other  point  is  illustrated  in  the  action  of  the  reli 
gious  bodies  in  the  two  sections  of  the  country.  They 
have  given,  in  their  influence  over  the  people,  the  most 
powerful  aid  to  the  respective  Governments.  Those  in 
the  North  could,  in  conscience  and  before  God,  do  nothing 
less.  They  did  but  their  duty.  We  say  nothing  here 

*  We  find  the  views  we  have  taken  concerning  the  responsibility  of  the  Southern 
Church  and  the  Southern  Clergy,  fully  sustained  by  the  Rev.  Dr.  George  Junkin,  in 
his  work  entitled  "Political  Fallacies."  Dr.  Junkin  was,  at  the  beginning  of  the 
rebellion,  President  of  Washington  College,  at  Lexington,  in  the  Valley  of  Virginia, 
and,  from  his  position  and  enlarged  acquaintance,  is  a  most  competent  witness.  He 
says:  "These  Southern  Presbyterians  are  either  laughing  at  your  simplicity  or 
pitying  your  stupidity.  For,  first,  it  is  notorious  that  they  held  the  controlling 
power  in  their  hands.  I  could  name  half  a  dozen  of  Presbyterian  ministers  who 
could  have  arrested  the  secession,  if  they  had  seen  fit.  Notoriously,  the  Presby 
terian  ministers  of  the.  South  were  the  leading  spirits  of  the,  rebellion.  It  could 
not  have  been  started  without  th&m.  That  stupendous  victory,  won  by  ten  thou 
sand  of  the  unconquerable  chivalry,  over  Robert  Anderson  and  his  seventy-two  half- 
starved  soldiers,  after  thirty-six  hours  of  heavy  cannonading,  could  never  have  been 
achieved  but  for  the  encouraging  shouts  of  Rev.  James  II.  Thornwcll,  D.  D.,  and 
Rev.  Benjamin  M.  Palmer  D.  D.  But  secondly,  even  in  the  Border  States,  the 
Presbyterian  ministers  alone,  if  they  had  had  a  moiety  of  the  heroic  martyr  spirit 
of  Robert  J.  Breckinridge,  could  have  shut  up  the  sluices  of  treason  and  turned  the 
battle  from  the  gates.  All  that  wns  needed  was  to  present  a  solid  front,  and  the 
demon  spirit  would  have  cowered  before  them  and  slunk  back  to  his  own  den. 
Had  my  beloved  brother,  Dr.  White,  and  his  twelve  Union  elders,  stood  firmly  to 
gether,  all  the  demons  of  pandemonium,  and  Charleston,  too,  could  not  have  driven 
them  from  Rockbridge  county,  and  forced  treason  and  rebellion  on  a  people  who  had 
voted  more  than  ten  to  one  in  favor  of  the  Union  candidates  for  the  (Virginia  State) 
Convention." 


LOYALTY  OF  NORTHERN  CHURCHES.        203 

upon  the  character  and  details  of  the  "  deliverances  "  and 
"resolutions"  adopted.  Some  of  them,  in  some  branches 
of  the  Church,  may  have  points  of  special  faul tineas.  We 
now  speak  only  of  the  one  principle  running  through  them 
all,  of  allegiance  to  the  Government.  To  express  that 
unequivocally,  at  such  a  time  of  civil  war,  was  their  mani 
fest  duty;  for  the  same  civil  obligations  rest  upon  the 
Church,  in  her  corporate  or  organic  capacity,  as  rest  upon 
any  other  organizations  of  men,  or  upon  the  individual 
citizen,  so  far  as  they  may  apply  to  each  respectively. 
These  religious  bodies,  as  such,  are  under  civil  protection, 
which  the  Government  is  bound  to  render;  they  enjoy 
immunities  which  the  civil  authorities  grant  and  guard ; 
they  hold  property  under  the  laws  of  the  land  ;  their  char 
ters  and  franchises  are  from  the  State ;  they  have  the  same 
rights  and  privileges  at  law  and  in  equity  which  other  cor 
porations  enjoy ;  and  in  other  ways,  in  their  organic  cha 
racter,  do  they  stand  related  to  the  Government. 

By  virtue  of  their  public  organization,  and  of  their  rela 
tions  to  the  civil  power,  these  religious  bodies  wield  a  vast 
influence  over  society,  and  especially  over  its  more  influen 
tial  classes.  By  virtue  of  these  things,  they  owe,  in  their 
organic  diameter,  full  allegiance  to  the  civil  authority. 
Every  principle  of  the  Word  of  God,  of  human  law,  of 
common  sense,  and  every  principle  in  any  way  entering 
into  the  welfare  of  society,  shows  this  beyond  dispute. 
It  is,  therefore,  their  manifest  duty,  in  their  organic  char 
acter  as  public  bodies,  when  the  land  is  rent  and  torn  by 
foul  rebellion,  striving  to  overthrow  the  Government,  for 
mally  to  express  their  allegiance  to  the  Government  before 
all  men.  If  it  be  said  that  this  is  political  action,  we  meet 
it  with  a  denial.  It  is  action  which  God  enjoins  as  a  duty 
of  religion  ;  and  should  be  recognized  among  the  demands 

of  conscience. 

10 


204         RESPONSIBILITY    OF    THE    SOUTHERN    CHURCH. 


DUTY    OF    THE    SOUTHERN    CHURCH    THE    SAME. 

On  the  other  hand,  it  was  equally  the  duty  of  the  Church 
in  the  South  to  stand  by  the  Government  in  opposition  to 
rebellion.  Had  she  done  this,  it  is  the  testimony  of  South 
ern  politicians  that  they  could  not  have  succeeded  in 
initiating  civil  war.  But  be  this  as  it  may,  it  was  equally 
her  duty. 

What  right  had  the  Presbyterian  Church  in  the  rebel 
Stat3s,  for  example,  in  defiance  of  her  civil  and  religious 
obligations,  to  give  in  her  adhesion,  organically,  to  a 
rebellious  Power  styled  the  "Confederate  St;ites  of  Amer 
ica,"  at  the  earliest  stage  of  the  rebellion?  A  time  might 
possibly  come  when  it  would  be  right  for  her  to  acknowl 
edge  such  a  Government  de  facto.  But  that  time  had  not 
arrived  when  her  leading  men  took  their  earliest  step. 
They  bounded  into  the  arena  at  the  ve"y  beginning  of  the 
civil  strife.  Some  of  them,  in  their  public  utterances,  went 
ahead  of  the  politicians  around  them ;  and  some  ecclesi 
astical  bodies  did  the  same. 

Was  this  a  proper  spectacle  to  be  presented  by  the 
Church  of  God?  It  is,  rather,  her  decent  mission  to  ad 
here  to  "the  powers"  which  God  has  placed  over  her,  an  I 
when  the  issues  of  a  bloody  rebellion  shall  have  been  de 
termined,  then  to  acquiesce  in  the  re-mi t.  The  case  is  not 
altered,  even  when,  as  in  the  South,  tlie  fires  of  revolution 
were  burning  around  or  even  within  her.  She  is  still  to 
stand  to  her  civil  as  well  as  to  her  religious  obligations, 
and  abide  the  issue. 

But  this,  it  may  be  said,  would  have  subjected  her  to 
persecution,  and  brought  her  ministers  to  the  halter. 
Well — what  of  that?  May  we  abandon  duty  for  safety? 
Are  we  not  to  suffer,  as  well  as  do,  the  will  of  God  ?  We 
do  not  suppose  we  should  have  been,  personally,  more 


DUTY    OF   THE   SOUTHERN    CHURCH    THE    SAME.        205 

ready  for  Southern  martyrdom  than  other  people,  but  that 
cannot  in  the  least  affect  the  vital  principle  here  at  stake. 
It  is  merely  a  question  whether  allegiance  to  the  civil 
authority  is  a  duty  of  the  Church.  If  that  be  decided 
affirmatively,  as  it  clearly  must  be,  then  it  is  as  incumbent 
on  the  Church  to  discharge  that  duty  as  any  other ;  and 
if  God  in  His  providence  call  her  to  suifer,  it  is  as  much 
her  duty  to  suffer  in  defence  of  her  civil  rights  and  in  the 
discharge  of  her  civil  obligations  as  for  any  others,  for 
they  are  all  founded  on  and  enforced  by  the  highest  re 
ligious  sanctions. 

This  path  of  duty  is,  too,  after  all,  the  only  path  of 
safety ;  for  if  it  shall  ever  come  to  a  practical  question  of 
halters,  it  may  be  found  that  they  can  be  used  by  the  law 
ful  Government  of  the  Union  as  well  as  by  the  abortive 
Government  of  the  rebellion.  And  when  the  future  Church 
historian  shall  record  the  sufferings  for  righteousness'  sake 
endured  in  this  war,  he  will  give  a  high  place  in  the  niche 
of  fame  to  those  ministers  of  the  South,  though  few  in 
number,  who  have  been  incarcerated  and  hung  because 
they  would  not  bow  their  necks  to  treason;  while  the 
memory  of  those  who  have  led  the  Church  astray,  and 
thus  prepared  an  easier  triumph  for  political  demagogues, 
and  a  more  ready  altar  for  the  sacrifice  of  thousands  of 
their  countrymen,  will  go  down  to  posterity  with  an  in 
supportable  load  of  infamy. 

If,  for  the  sake  of  present  safety  and  peace,  the  Church 
may  even  quietly  acquiesce  in  all  the  horrid  work  of  this 
rebellion,  without  raising  her  voice  in  remonstrance  to 
even  her  own  members  who  are  giving  all  their  energies 
to  its  support,  then  there  is  no  fluty  of  Scripture  which 
she  may  not  neglect,  and  no  fact  which  gives  glory  to  her 
past  history  which  she  may  not  ignore.  Had  the  Southern 
Church  taken  and  maintained  a  righteous  and  heroic  stand, 


206         RESPONSIBILITY    OF   THE    SOUTHERN   CHURCH. 

and  been  subjected  to  persecution  therefor,  she  would  have 
come  out  of  the  furnace  with  no  such  odious  smell  upon 
her  garments  as  must  now  attach  to  them,  for  leaping  into 
the  front  rank  of  the  hordes  of  treason,  winning  the  earli 
est  and  highest  honors  in  its  apologetic  literature,  and 
leading  on  its  armed  legions  to  battle.  We  envy  not  the 
fame  which  these  men  will  have  in  the  opinion  of  mankind, 
nor  the  reward  which  will  be  meted  out  to  them  in  the 
just  judgment  of  God ! 


CLERICAL   DISLOYALTY   IN   LOYAL    STATES.  207 


CHAPTER   VI. 

CLERICAL  DISLOYALTY   IN   LOYAL  STATES. 

IT  is  a  phase  of  the  general  subject  in  close  alliance  with 
that  treated  in  the  preceding  chapter,  that  a  similar  oppo 
sition  to  the  Government  is  seen  in  marked  instances 
among  clergymen  in  some  of  the  loyal  States. 

The  great  body  of  the  clergy  of  all  denominations  in  the 
loyal  States,  have  unquestionably  been  loyal  to  the  Gen 
eral  Government.  But  not  a  few,  and  among  them  men 
of  ability  and  influence,  have  shown  decided  sympathy 
with  the  rebellion ;  sometimes  in  overt  acts,  often  in  speech 
and  in  their  writings,  and  through  other  methods  ;  and 
sometimes  by  a  reticence  which  has  been  quite  as  signifi 
cant  as  any  open  line  of  conduct.  Some  of  this  descrip 
tion  have  been  required  to  take  an  oath  of  allegiance  to 
the  Government,  which  they  have  done  reluctantly.  Some 
would  not  take  it,  or  their  course  was  such  that  the  alter 
native  was  not  offered  them ;  and  they  have  voluntarily 
left,  or  have  been  sent  out  of  the  country.  Others,  whose 
acts  have  been  deemed  more  highly  criminal,  have  been 
imprisoned ;  while  still  another  class  have  been  sent  South 
beyond  the  lines  of  the  Union  armies,  as  in  several  in 
stances  in  Tennessee  and  other  States. 

The  more  numerous  cases  of  disloyalty  among  clergy 
men  in  the  loyal  portion  of  the  country,  are  to  be  found  in 
the  Border  Slave  States  and  in  the  District  of  Columbia. 
We  give  illustrations  in  a  few  example^,  from  which  others 
will  be  readily  called  to  mind  by  those  who  are  familiar 
with  current  events.  Similar  instances  may  probably  be 
found  in  all  the  Border  States. 


208  CLERICAL   DISLOYALTY    IX   LOYAL    STATES. 


CLERICAL    SYMPATHIZERS    IN   MARYLAND. 

The  difficulties  which  Bishop  Wliittingham,  of  the  Epis 
copal  Church  in  Maryland,  had  with  some  of  his  clergy,  in 
the  early  period  of  the  rebellion,  are  well  known.  As  a 
loyal  Prelate,  he  observed  the  recommendation  of  the  Gov 
ernment  in  its  appointment  of  Fast  and  Thanksgiving 
Days ;  issued  his  letter  to  his  clergy,  enjoining  observance, 
and  prescribed  suitable  prayers  for  the  service;  but  from 
some  of  the  Rectors  under  his  charge,  earnest  protests 
were  made,  clearly  revealing  their  rebel  proclivities.  The 
prayers  he  has  written,  to  be  used  during  the  continuance 
of  the  war,  are  even  now  omitted  in  some  Churches,  or  the 
clergy  and  the  Bishop  have  been  brought  into  open  col 
lision  upon  the  issue  ;  while  the  customary  prayer  for  the 
President  of  the  United  States,  co-existent  with  the  Church 
service  itself,  is  omitted  in  some  cases,  or  hypocritically 
uttered. 

Other  denominations  in  Maryland,  especially  in  Balti 
more,  have  had  ministers  in  their  pulpits  who  would  riot 
observe  the  public  days  and  service  recommended  by  the 
Government,  by  reason  of  their  rebel  sympathies. 

Ministers  in  some  Churches  in  Baltimore,  as  reported 
in  the  daily  papers  of  that  city,  have  succumbed  to  the 
demand  of  their  parishioners  that  prayers  should  not  be 
offered  for  the  President,  and  have  left  their  charges ; 
while  in  other  congregations,  both  Protestant  and  Catho 
lic,  where  such  prayers  have  been  offered,  open  manifesta 
tions  of  disapprobation  have  been  made,  sometimes  by 
worshippers  leaving  the  house  during  that  part  of  the  ser 
vice,  and  at  other  times  by  significant  marks  of  dissent 
while  retaining  their  seats.  Some  ministers  left  Maryland, 
by  reason  of  their  Southern  sympathies,  and  early  cast  in 
their  lot  with  the  fortunes  of  the  rebellion. 


MINISTERS    IN    THE    DISTRICT    OF    COLUMBIA.  209 


DISLOYAL    MINISTERS    IX    THE    DISTRICT    OF    COLUMBIA. 

It  is  somewhat  surprising  that  ministers  should  sympa 
thize  with  a  rebellion  seeking  the  overthrow  of  that  Gov 
ernment  under  the  very  shadow  of  whose  seat  of  Admin 
istration  they  live,  and  whose  protection  makes  their  homes 
safe  and  their  daily  bread  sure.  But  so  it  was,  at  the 
beginning  of  the  rebellion,  with  two  prominent  clergymen 
of  George-town,  in  the  District  of  Columbia.  We  cannot 
account  for  it  except  on  the  principle  that  they  had  Vir 
ginia  blood  in  their  veins,  of  the  modern  quality.  It  cer 
tainly  could  claim  no  affinity  with  that  which  character 
ized  the  era  of  Washington  and  his  compeers. 

One  of  these  men  is  the  Rev.  John  H.  Bocock,  D.  D., 
at  the  time  Pastor  of  the  Bridge  Street  Presbyterian 
Church,  in  Georgetown.  On  the  call  of  President  Lin 
coln  for  seventy-five  thousand  troops,  April  15,  1861,  the 
amiable  Doctor  said,  that  "  the  yellow  fever,  in  the  course 
of  the  summer,  would  be  worth  seventy  thousand  troops 
to  us  y"  accompanying  the  remark  with  significant  signs 
of  satisfaction.  His  rebel  proclivities  became  so  demon 
strative,  at  a  period  a  little  later,  that  he  was  obliged  to 
go  South,  beyond  the  lines  of  the  Federal  army.  He  has 
since  given  in  his  full  adhesion  to  the  rebellion,  and  was 
at  one  time  engaged  in  superintending  a  manufactory  of 
the  munitions  of  war  in  Richmond,  where  it  was  reported 
he  was  seriously  injured  by  an  explosion  which  occurred 
in  the  establishment  during  the  summer  of  1863. 

The  other  gentleman  referred  to  is  the  Rev.  Dr.  Nor 
wood,  Rector  of  an  Episcopal  Church  in  the  same  city, 
when  the  rebellion  began.  On  the  latter  part  of  that 
mournful  Sabbath  on  which  the  first  battle  of  Bull  Run 
was  fought,  July  21,  1861,  the  secessionists  of  the  North, 
and  especially  those  near  the  seat  of  the  General  Govern- 


210  CLERICAL    DISLOYALTY    IN   LOYAL   STATES. 

ment,  were  in  high  glee.  During  the  early  part  of  the 
day,  and  until  near  its  close,  it  was  supposed  the  Union 
troops  had  been  victorious ;  but  when  stragglers  from  our 
army  poured  into  the  capital,  and  wended  their  way 
through  the  streets  of  Washington  and  Georgetown,  and 
the  result  of  the  contest  became  known,  the  rebel  joy 
could  no  longer  be  restrained.  The  pious  Rector  referred 
to  was  too  much  elated  to  hold  religious  service  in  the 
evening  of  that  Sabbath,  and  hence  ordered  that  the 
Church-going  bell  should  not  be  rung,  and  it  was  accord 
ingly  silent,  and  the  Church  closed.  But,  instead  of  the 
usual  worship,  so  "irrepressible"  was  the  gladness  at. the 
defeat  of  the  Federal  arms,  that  the  good  Rector  and  a 
portion  of  his  parishioners  held  a  sort  of  levee  on  the  porch 
of  his  house ;  and  as  the  flying  rumors  of  disaster  came  in 
quick  succession  from  the  battle-field,  they  eagerly  drank 
them  in,  and  their  congratulatory  "  responses"  resounded 
through  the  balmy  Sabbath  evening  air ;  and  this,  too, 
when  some  of  the  loyal  citizens  feared  for  the  safety  of  the 
capital.  On  the  announcement  of  one  "  rumor,"  the  joy 
over  the  Union  disaster  seemed  to  reach  its  climax.  It  was 
reported  that  Colonel  Corcoran,  of  the  New- York  Sixty- 
ninth  (Irish)  regiment,  who  was  taken  prisoner,  had  been 
killed.  The* "Thank  God  for  that,"  which  was  uttered 
from  the  lips  of  feminine  delicacy  by  a  member  of  the 
Rector's  family,  was  "  applauded  to  the  echo." 

Dr.  Norwood  soon  became  too  demonstrative  to  suit  the 
military  authorities,  and  he  too  went  to  "  his  own  place" — 
within  the  rebel  lines. 

It  is  believed  that  in  no  place  within  the  jurisdiction  of 
the  General  Government,  are  rebel  sympathies  among  the 
religious  people  more  demonstrative  than  in  the  two  cities  :it 
the  seat  of  Government ;  a  sad  testimony  for  their  iv'igV.is 
guides. 


REV.    THOS.    A.    HOYT.  211 


REBEL   SYMPATHIZERS    AMONG   KENTUCKY    CLERGYMEN. 

The  more  prominent  open  sympathizers  with  the  rebel 
lion,  among  clergymen  in  Kentucky,  are  two  Presbyterian 
Pastors,  the  Rev.  Thomas  A.  Hoyt,  and  the  Rev.  Stuart 
Robinson,  D.  D.  The  former  is  a  South  Carolinian  by 
birth,  and  the  latter  an  Irishman.  The  former  is  Pastor  of 
the  First,  and  the  latter  of  the  Second  Presbyterian  Church 
in  Louisville.  Though  they  have  both  been  exiled  from 
Kentucky  for  some  two  years  or  thereabouts,  they  still 
retain,  we  believe,  in  form  at  least,  the  Pastoral  connection 
with  their  respective  Churches.  Why  this  is,  we  do  not 
know,  unless  it  be  that  a  large  portion  of  their  congrega 
tions  sympathize  with  them.  Whether  they  are,  for  the 
time,  "  retired  on  half  pay,"  or  have  their  salaries  paid  in 
full,  are  private  matters,  and  best  known  to  those  who  foot 
the  bills.  We  refer  to  them  because  they  are  represent 
ative  men  of  a  considerable  class,  and  because  their 
respective  cases  illustrate  important  principles  involved  in 
the  struggle  between  loyalty  and  treason. 

REV.    THOMAS    A.    HOYT. 

Some  two  years  since,  Mr.  Hoyt  wras  arrested  in  Ohio 
for  certain  proceedings  alleged  to  be  disloyal,  in  connec 
tion  with  a  Presbyterian  clergyman  of  St.  Louis,  and  they 
together  were  for  a  short  time  imprisoned  in  Newport 
Barracks,  opposite  Cincinnati.  On  being  released,  Dr. 
Brookes,  of  St.  Louis,  as  we  were  informed,  took  the  oath 
of  allegiance ;  and  we  learn  that  he  has  since  been  com 
mend  ably  loyal,  and  is  now  a  warm  supporter  of  the 
Government  in  its  contest  with  treason.  Mr.  Hoyt  would 
not  take  the  oath  of  allegiance,  and  was  sent  by  the  mili 
tary  authorities  aw^ay  from  his  charge  in  Louisville.  Why 
he  did  not  return  to  his  native  South,  whvn  offered  the 
10* 


212  CLERICAL    DISLOYALTY    IN    LOYAL    STATES. 

privilege,  was  surprising  to  some  who  had  the  matter  in 
charge.  He  was  permitted  to  go  to  the  "  hated  North." 
For  a  time,  we  believe,  he  sojourned  in  Canada.  But 
New  York  city  is  understood  to  be  his  "  Head-quarters  ;" 
whence,  as  occasion  requires,  not  being  permitted  to  preach 
in  Louisville,  "for  his  oath's  sake,"  he  can  preach  for  his 
sympathizing  brother  Van  Dyke,  of  Brooklyn,  where  it 
may  be  oaths  are  not  required. 

We  have  never  been  able  to  understand  why  a  clergy 
man  who  is  not  permitted  to  remain  at  home  and  preach 
because  of  his  disloyalty,  or  for  refusal  to  take  the  oath  of 
allegiance,  should  be  permitted  to  go  elsewhere  within  the 
jurisdiction  of  the  Government  with  entire  freedom  and 
"  exercise  his  gifts."  If  it  is  the  principle  of  criminality 
for  which  he  is  exiled,  he  should  be  turned  over  to  the 
rebels  or  exiled  out  of  the  country ;  for  a  man  who  will 
not  acknowledge  the  first  duty  of  a  citizen,  to  be  obedient 
to  the  Government  under  which  he  lives,  puts  himself 
entirely  without  the  Government's  protection.  If  it  be 
merely  to  prevent  the  harm  which  a  disloyal  man  may  do, 
we  think  he  could  do  less  at  home  than  abroad.  The  con 
gregating  of  disloyal  clergymen  who  have  been  exiled 
from  New  Orleans  and  fro:n  other  Southern  cities  because 
they  would  not  take  the  oath,  in  the  city  of  New  York,  for 
example, — the  head-quarters  of  rebel  sympathizers, — aifords 
greater  facilities  for  aiding  the  rebellion  than  they  would 
have  if  they  were  back  in  the  Crescent  City,  under  the 
watchful  eye  of  a  military  police. 


Mr.  Hoyt's  position  was  defined  at  an  early  period  of 
the  rebellion.  On  the  National  Fast  Day  appointed  by 
President  Buchanan,  January  4,  1861,  he  preached  in  his 
Church  in  Louisville,  and  published  his  sermon  in  the 


MR.    HOYT'S    DISLOYAL    SERMON.  213 

Presbyterian  Herald,  then  issued  in  that  oily,  January 
10th.  This  discourse  is  instructive  on  the  following  points : 
It  shows  that  Mr.  Hoyt  agrees  with  other  Southern  men, 
that  slavery  lies  at  the  root  of  the  strife  ;  it  is  an  exhorta 
tion  to  the  citizens  of  Kentucky  and  other  slave  States,  to 
resist  the  Government,  and  let  the  seceders  go  their  way; 
and  while  he  is  one  of  that  class  who  deem  it  sacrilege  to 
introduce  "politics  into  the  pulpit,"  he  here  shows  us 
what,  on  this  question,  in  his  judgment,  is  not  "  politics," 
by  deciding  the  gravest  matters  of  political  duty  concern 
ing  the  Government,  and  exhorting  his  congregation  to 
the  most  definite  line  of  action  upon  them ;  and  much  more 
of  the  same  sort.  We  here  give  a  few  illustrations. 

In  the  following  paragraph,  he  intimates  the  importance 
of  the  issues  involved,  in  the  contest  then  impending : 

And  first,  we  should  settle  in  our  minds  that  great  principles  under 
lie  this  whole  matter ;  we  should  avoid  superficial  views,  and  strive  to 
see  the  mighty  issues  that  are  pending.  This  is  no  temporary,  though 
acute,  disorder  of  the  body  politic,  but  a  chronic  distemper,  now  break 
ing  out  afresh  and  throwing  the  patient  into  convulsions.  This  young 
giant  would  not  writhe  and  perish  under  a  mere  functional  derange 
ment;  an  organic  disease  preys  upon  the  vitals.  The  different  portions 
of  our  country  could  not  come  into  such  hostile  and  deadly  collision, 
upon  the  ordinary  questions  of  public  policy. 

Then,  under  the  carefully-guarded  phraseology  employed 
in  the  following  paragraph,  he  means  to  intimate  that 
slavery  is  the  disturbing  element.  Nothing  else  of  a  reli 
gious  nature  can  be  referred  to,  where  he  speaks  of  "  re 
vealed  truth  ;"  and  slavery  is  also  covered  up  under  some 
other  phrases.  The  italics  are  his.  The  "  one  section"  is 
of  course  the  South  : 

One  section  of  this  country  believes  that  its  dearest  rights  are  injured 
— the  right  of  self-government,  the  right  to  Constitutional  liberty,  the 
right  to  equality  in  the  common  Government  and  common  domain  ;  she 
believes  that  along  with  these  rights  is  implicated  the  truth,  the  truth  of 


214  CLERICAL    DISLOYALTY    IN    LOYAL    STATES. 

God,  the  revealed  truth  of  God ;  and  believing  that  these  priceless  trea 
sures  are  gliding  from  her  grasp,  she  is  struggling  to  regain  them.  If 
all  this  be  true,  if  our  liberties  and  our  religion  are  in  danger,  what  have 
we  to  do  but  to  stand  up  boldly  for  our  rights  ? 

POLITICAL    PREACHING    DEFINED. 

He  determines  against  his  right  to  "  preach  politics ;" 
and  shows  what  is  involved  therein,  as  follows : 

Questions  of  great  magnitude  and  difficulty  arise  as  to  the  time  and 
mode,  the  when  and  the  how,  of  discharging  our  duties  in  this  matter. 
But  these  are  purely  political  questions,  and  as  such  cannot  properly 
be  discussed  in  the  pulpit. 

We  think  we  see  it  now.  The  "  time"  and  the  "  mode," 
and  the  "  when1'  and  the  "  how,"  in  regard  to  "  discharging 
our  duties,"  make  up  the  political"  while  the  u  duties" 
themselves  are  religious.  Mark  this  distinction,  all  ye  who 
preach  the  Gospel,  and  whose  vocation  it  is  to  teach  others 
how  to  preach  it.  This  we  should  deem  one  of  the  latest 
South  Carolina  distinctions.  After  having  clearly  stated 
it,  Mr.  Hoyt  then  expatiates  on  the  political  and  non- 
pulpit  side  of  it,  still  further : 

Born  on  the  soil  of  South  Carolina,  and  educated  in  her  views,  I  have 
not  abjured  the  convictions  of  a  lifetime  and  professed  to  have  received 
a  new  revelation,  but  I  have  been  true  to  the  instincts  of  nature,  and 
have  cherished  the  lessons  that  I  drank  in  with  my  mother's  milk.  But 
what  I  may  think  as  a  man  is  of  no  consequence  to  you  on  this  occa 
sion  and  in  this  place  ;  you  only  wish  to  know  the  message  of  the  Lord 
at  my  mouth.  The  terms  of  my  commission  are  limited — I  am  com 
manded  to  teach  religion,  and  am  allowed  to  touch  on  other  topics  only 
so  far  as  they  touch  on  religion.  Were  it  otherwise,  were  I  allowedfull 
scope,  my  natural  feelings  would  spring  forward  with  alacrity  to  discuss 
this  whole  matter.  But  I  dare  not  do  it ;  my  commission  forbids  it. 
*  *  *  ;por  these  reasons.  I  cannot  take  up  those  questions — they 
are  civil,  and  not  at  all  religious. 

That  is,  the  "  civil"  questions  concerning  the  "  time," 


RELIGIOUS    PREACHING    DEFINED.  215 

the  "  mode,"  the  "  when/'  and  the  "  how ;"  for  he  speci 
fies  no  others  which  are  political. 

RELIGIOUS   PREACHING    DEFINED. 

He  then  exhibits  the  religious  side  : 

But  there  are  other  aspects  of  the  matter  which  rightfully  fall  within 
the  scope  of  this  day's  discourse — aspects  which  are  so  strenuously  urged 
by  every  dictate  of  humanity  and  religion,  and  which  so  exactly  tally 
with  the  precepts  of  the  Gospel  of  peace,  that  I  feel  bound  to  press  them 
upon  your  attention.  The  question  that  lifts  its  solemn  presence 
amongst  us  this  day  is,  "  Shall  we  have  peace  or  war  ?" 

How  easily  a  man  can  deceive  himself  by  using  the 
phrase  "Gospel  of  peace,"  and  how  convincingly  persuade 
a  certain  class  of  his  hearers  that  he  is  not  meddling  with 
either  politics  or  war.  We  have  a  good  illustration  of 
this  before  us.  Mr.  Hoy t  abjures  "politics;"  but  when 
he  comes  to  put  in  practice  his  right  to  preach  religion,  he 
shows  that  it  embodies  the  following  political  things,  as 
exemplified  in  this  particular  discourse :  Allowing  him  to 
decide,  that  the  "  secession"  which  had  then  taken  place 
was  "  a  revolution  accomplished"  said  so  to  instruct  the 
people  ;  that  the  Federal  Government  has  no  right  to 
employ  force  to  maintain  its  authority  over  the  seceded 
States  ;  that  "  the  whole  power  of  the  Federal  Govern 
ment"  cannot  do  this ;  that,  should  it  be  attempted,  the 
people  of  Kentucky  and  other  Border  slave  States,  a  por 
tion  of  whom  he  was  addressing,  should  resist  the  Federal 
Government,  "  should  rise  up  and  hough  the  horses  of 
war," — that  is,  if  the  Government  should  undertake  force 
of  arms  against  the  rebels,  Kentucky  and  the  other  Border 
slave  States  should  put  themselves  into  an  attitude  of 
rebellion  by  openly  opposing  the  Government ;  and  then, 
that  the  seceded  States  must  enter  on  war,  at  all  hazards 


216  CLERICAL   DISLOYALTY   IN   LOYAL   STATES. 

if  need  be,  to  maintain  the  doctrine  of  secession  :  all 
which  he  felt  "  bound  to  press"'  upon  the  people  as  their 
religious  duty. 

The  point  here  is  none  other  thnn  this, — that  these 
u  duties"  are  "  religious,"  and  as  such  Mr.  Hoyt  is  author 
ized  to  preach  them,  and  exhort  to  their  discharge ; 
whereas,  to  point  out  the  "  time"  and  the  "  mode,"  the 
"  how"  an  1  the  "  when,"  would  be  "  political,"  and  a  vio 
lation  of  his  commission. 

WAR   PREACHED    IN   THE    NAME    OF    PEACE. 

Let  us  see  how  fully  the  points  we  have  made  are  sus 
tained  by  his  own  language.  Commencing  our  quotation 
immediately  after  his  question,  "  Shall  we  have  peace  or 
war  ?"  he  proceeds : 

The  responsibility  of  its  answer  rests  upon  you  as  citizens  of  Ken 
tucky,  and  as  a  portion  of  the  middle  slaveholding  States,  it  is  for  them 
to  say  whether  blood  shall  be  shed.  They  may  have  delayed  their 
answer  too  long,  but  I  trust  not.  Tliese  great  States  should  rise  up  from 
their  knees  this  day  and  hough  the  horses  of  war.  [That  is,  as  appears, 
the  Northern  or  Government  "  horses."]  They  should  say  to  the  North, 
You  SHALL  NOT  attempt  force  towards  the  seceding  States — THEY  MUST 
be  allowed  peaceably  to  go  out,  if  they  choose.  It  is  not  necessary  that 
you  should  admit  the  right  of  secession.  You  may  regard  it  as  a  revo 
lution,  but  as  a  revolution  ACCOMPLISHED.  You  may  say,  if  you  choose, 
that  we  do  not  admit  that  our  Constitution  contemplated  secession,  and 
that  we  do  not  think  the  cotton  States  warranted  in  what  they  have 
done ;  but,  as  they  have  done  it,  WE  WILL  NOT  PERMIT  them  to  be  assailed. 

And  is  it  not  a  revolution  accomplished  ?  Does  a  revolution  ever  go 
backward  ?  Can  force  compel  South  Carolina  to  return  ?  No !  the 
whole  power  of  the  Federal  Government  is  inadequate  to  the  task.  She 
may  be  overrun  by  invading  armies ;  her  cities  may  be  demolished,  and 
her  fields  ravaged;  her  churches  may  be  deserted  to  the  moles  and  the 
bats;  her  classic  halls  may  echo  the  hoot  of  the  midnight  owl;  her 
sons  may  perish  on  a  hundred  battle-fields ;  her  women,  and  children, 
and  old  men,  may  fly  from  their  burning  dwellings;  but  she  can  never 
be  conquered — never,  never  1 


THE    GKAND   DISTINCTION".  217 

On  speaking  of  the  rights  and  dangers  of  the  South,  he 
thus  enlarges  upon  the  duty  of  maintaining  them  by  force, 
if  need  be,  even  to  the  decapitation  of  the  supreme 
authorities  : 

If  all  this  be  true,  if  our  liberties  and  our  religion  are  in  danger,  what 
have  we  to  do  but  to  stand  up  boldly  for  our  rights — rights  that  we 
inherit  as  Englishmen  and  as  Americans ;  rights  that  began  to  be 
secured  to  us  when  the  Barons  wrested  Magna  Charta  from  the  nerve 
less  grasp  of  King  John  ;  rights  that  sought  revenge  for  their  violation 
in  the  royal  blood  of  Charles  I.;  rights,  the  vindication  of  which 
hurled  James  II.  from  the  throne;  rights,  that,  rising  to  still  grander 
proportions  in  this  New  World,  found  a  champion  in  Washington,  and 
an  embodiment  in  the  institutions  of  our  country. 

THE    GRAND    DISTINCTION RELIGION   AND   POLITICS. 

We  have  then,  here,  a  practical  illustration  of  what  it  is 
for  the  pulpit  to  eschew  "  politics"  and  preach  "  religion." 
It  is  preaching  religion  to  decide  high  questions  of  State ; 
to  declare  what  the  Government  has  a  right  to  do,  and 
what  it  has  no  authority  or  power  to  do  ;  to  settle  the 
whole  doctrine  of  "  State  rights,"  of  which  "  secession," 
deemed  "  a  revolution  accomplished,"  is  the  culmination  ; 
to  determine  constructions  of  the  Constitution,  wherein 
statesmen  differ ;  to  decide,  that  in  case  the  Government 
determines  on  asserting  its  authority  to  overthrow  trea 
son,  it  is  the  duty  of  the  people  of  other  great  States  to 
run  into  treason  and  rebellion  likewise;  and,  most  espe 
cially,  under  the  specious  language,  "  the  Gospel  of  peace" 
to  cause  the  Church  to  resound  to  the  blast  of  the  war- 
trumpet,  to  summon  men  to  join  the  armies  of  revolt 
against  a  lawful  popular  Government.  All  this  is  religion, 
and  in  it  the  people  are  instructed  by  authority.  To  add 
the  ingredient  of  politics,  which  would  defile  the  whole  ser 
vice,  it  is  only  necessary  to  determine  the  "  time"  and 
the  "  mode,"  the  "  how"  and  the  "  when." 


218  CLERICAL   DISLOYALTY   IN   LOYAL    STATES. 

This  is  a  pretty  fair  specimen  of  the  value  which  that 
class  of  men,  who  are  ever  harping  about  "  political 
preachers,"  place  upon  their  own  doctrine.  The  senti 
ments  preached  are  sufficiently  "  religious,"  if  they  are  on 
their  side  ;  but  they  are  wickedly  "  political,"  if  opposed 
to  their  views. 

NO    POSSIBLE    NEUTRALITY. 

We  commend  the  outspoken  frankness  of  Mr.  Hoyt,  so 
far  as  seen  in  contrast  with  another  class,  remarkably  re 
ticent.  In  a  time  of  treason,  rebellion,  and  devastating 
civil  war,  it  is  every  man's  solemn  duty, — clergyman  or 
layman, — to  show  his  colors.  It  is  a  sin  to  do  otherwise. 
Neutrality,  at  such  a  time,  is  a  sin  against  God,  and  a 
crime  against  the  country.  But  there  is,  in  fact,  no  neu 
trality,  regarding  this  contest,  in  the  breast  of  any  Ameri 
can  citizen.  It  is  an  impossible  thing,  and  every  man 
knows  and  feels  it.  He  is  either  for  the  Government  in 
this  struggle,  or  against  it.  And  yet,  there  are  men  in 
the  Border  States,  and  elsewhere,  who  have  at  least  the 
form  of  manhood  in  outward  appearance, — men,  too,  who 
hold  a  commission,  as  they  declare,  from  God,  to  instruct 
the  people  in  their  religious  duties, — who,  in  this  contest 
between  loyalty  and  treason,  claim  to  be  "neutral,"  to 
have  "  no  opinion,"  and  to  deem  it  best  that  "  a  minister's 
views  should  not  be  known."  We  can  only  utter  for  such 
the  prayer  of  the  Judge  for  the  culprit  sentenced  to  the 
gallows,  "May  the  Lord  have  mercy  upon  their  souls!" 

While  we  admire  Mr.  Hoyt's  candor,  infinitely  better 
than  that  feigned  "  neutrality"  which  many  Border  State 
ministers  pretend  without  practising,  we  place  him  in  the 
same  list  of  guilty  responsibility  for  the  treason  and  rebel 
lion  now  desolating  the  land,  with  distinguished  ministers 
in  the  Rebel  States ;  with  this  marked  difference,  that  he 


REV.    STUART    ROBLNSON,    D.    D.  219 

is  living  within  the  loyal  district  covered  by  the  Govern 
ment,  while  giving  his  heart  and  his  preaching  in  the  line 
of  that  rebellion  which  is  seeking  its  overthrow. 

REV.    STUART    ROBIXSON,    D.    D. 

We  have  already  spoken  of  Dr.  Robinson  as  Pastor  of  a 
Church  in  Louisville,  at  the  beginning  of  the  rebellion,  and 
still  holding  a  formal  connection  with  it.  For  some  two 
years  he  has  been  an  exile  in  Canada,  living  in  Toronto. 
The  facts  about  his  exit  from  his  adopted  country,  and 
taking  refuge  under  the  flag  which  waves  over  the  "  swate 
isle"  in  which  he  was  born,  are  about  as  follows : 

During  the  summer  of  .1862,  when  temporarily  absent 
from  Louisville,  such  was  the  feeling  entertained  toward 
him  by  the  military  authorities  in  that  city,  as  his  friends 
believed,  that  they  advised  him  not  to  return.  He  took 
their  advice,  and  voluntarily  betook  himself  to  a  place 
without  the  jurisdiction  of  the  United  States,  where  he  has 
since  remained.  We  have  never  heard  what  was  charged 
against  him,  nor  why  his  friends  were  apprehensive  for  his 
safety,  in  case  he  should  return  home.  It  has  been  said  by 
some  of  them,  that  he  would  not  take  the  oath  of  allegiance, 
and  hence  would  not  return,  knowing  that  this  would  be 
required  of  him.  Dr.  Robinson  himself  has  admitted,  sub 
stantially  if  not  directly,  in  what  he  has  since  written  upon 
this  express  point,  that  he  would  not  take  the  oath  of 
allegiance  to  the  United  States  Government.  It  may  be, 
for  aught  we  know,  that  this  is  the  sole  occasion  of  his 
exile.  Even  if  this  is  all,  it  is  sufficient  proof  of  disloyalty 
with  right-minded  men. 

But  a  question  lies  back  of  this.  Why  was  such  a  de- 
maad  made  of  him  ?  What  words,  or  acts,  or  other  con 
duct,  was  he  guilty  of,  that  led  the  authorities  to  deem  the 
oath  requisite  in  his  particular  case  ?  All  ministers  are 


220  CLERICAL   DISLOYALTY   IN   LOYAL   STATES. 

not  required  to  take  an  oath  of  allegiance.  But  in  special 
cases,  such  requisition  has  been  deemed  essential  for  pub 
lic  safety.  A  minister  of  the  Gospel,  above  all  other  men, 
should  so  conduct,  that  he  cannot  even  be  suspected  of  being 
disloyal  to  the  Government  which  protects  him.  And  we 
venture  to  say,  that  there  has  been  no  case  of  arrest,  or 
infringement,  or  threatening  of  any  one's  liberty  or  safety, 
in  the  loyal  States,  concerning  whom  there  was  not  some 
good  ground  for  the  suspicion,  at  least,  that  he  was  in 
some  way  aiding  the  rebellion.  But  the  simple  fact  that 
Dr.  Robinson's  friends  thought,  and  his  judgment  and  con 
science  approved  the  suggestion,  that  Canada  was  a  safer 
place  for  him  than  Kentucky,  is  prima  facie  evidence  that 
the  case  is  against  him  ;  that  his  presence  and  influence  in 
Louisville  were  deemed  to  be  against  the  Government  by 
the  military  authorities,  and  that  it  would  be  improper  for 
him  to  return  there  without  taking  the  oath  of  allegiance ; 
all  which  is  strengthened  by  the  consideration  that  the 
Commander  of  that  Military  Department  at  the  time  was 
Dr.  Robinson's  particular  friend,  and  would  do  him  no 
inj  ustice. 

HE    EDITS    A    DISLOYAL    PAPER. 

Our  object  in  referring  to  this  case  at  all,  is,  that  it  fur 
nishes  a  striking  illustration  of  disloyalty  to  the  Govern 
ment,  and  sympathy  with  the  rebellion,  in  a  leading 
minister  of  a  Border  State,  which,  by  successive  votes  of 
its  people  at  the  polls,  has  determined  to  stand  by  the 
Government  and  the  Union.  We  need  not  go  for  proof  to 
what  he  did,  immediately  leading  to  his  exile.  Ever  since 
he  has  been  in  Canada,  he  has  edited  a  paper,  which  is 
issued  in  Louisville,  and  widely  circulated  in  Kentucky, 
from  which  the  proof  of  his  disloyalty  and  sympathy  with 
treason  and  rebellion  is  patent  to  all  who  read  the  sheet. 


DR.    ROBINSON    EDITS    A   DISLOYAL    PAPER.  221 

This  paper  is  called  The  True  Presbyterian.  It  was 
published  for  some  time  before  Dr.  Robinson  left  Ken 
tucky,  and  edited  by  him,  and  was  at  one  time  suspended 
by  military  authority ;  and  afterwards,  through  the  inter 
ference  of  a  friend,  the  resumption  of  its  publication  was 
allowed.  During  the  last  year  or  more,  its  disloyal  utter 
ances  have  been  more  outspoken  than  usual,  though  from 
first  to  last  its  whole  tone  and  spirit  have  been  pervaded 
with  hostility  to  the  course  of  the  Government  and  sym 
pathy  with  the  rebellion.  Its  articles  are  spiced  with  a 
venom  which  is  scarcely  rivalled  by  the  secular  prints  of 
Richmond. 

The  animating  spirit  of  the  paper  is  Dr.  Robinson,  safely 
housed  in  Toronto  under  the  protection  of  the  British  flag, 
while  the  paper  emanates  from  Louisville,  protected  in  its 
treasonable  influence  by  the  flag  of  the  United  States. 
We  have  not  the  least  doubt  that  The  True  Presbyterian 
is  one  of  the  most  powerful  auxiliaries  for  keeping  alive 
the  spirit  of  the  rebellion  among  the  secessionists  of 
Kentucky. 

In  saying  that  this  is  a  disloyal  sheet,  we  do  not  speak 
at  random ;  we  shall  give  the  proof.  For  the  responsi 
bility  of  its  influence,  its  editors,  publishers,  correspond 
ents,  subscribers,  and  patrons,  must  be  held  to  account, 
on  any  correct  principles  of  judgment ;  though,  as  AVC  have 
said,  Dr.  Robinson  is  the  soul  of  the  concern.  For  our 
individual  self,  as  w~e  have  taken  this  paper  from  the 
beginning,  our  conscience  is  vindicated  on  the  same  ground 
that  the  late  Dr.  Ernmons  justified  himself  for  purchasing- 
infidel  books.  Tie  said  his  library  contained  "  the  best 
and  worst  books  in  the  world  :"  that  it  was  necessary  for 
a  minister  to  consult  infidel  works  such  as  he  would  not 
recommend  to  his  people,  for  "  they  should  know  what  the 
Devil  is  about."  O:i  the  same  principle,  in  this  time  of 


222  CLERICAL    DISLOYALTY    IN    LOYAL    STATES. 

rebellion,  we  by  no  means  confine  our  reading  to  one  side 
of  the  question,  either  in  secular  or  religious  literature. 
We  consult  papers  and  books  of  all  parties,  and  especially 
those  which  claim  to  be  of  the  "  religious"  sort.  For  this 
purpose  we  have  taken,  as  long  as  the  mails  were  open, 
several  of  the  religious  papers  and  periodicals  of  the 
South.  On  the  same  principle,  if  his  Satanic  Majesty 
should  escape  to  the  earth,  and  set  up  a  religions  or  secular 
journal  in  some  metropolis  of  our  country,  we  should 
become  one  of  his  subscribers.  But  we  seriously  doubt 
whether  he  could  carry  out  his  designs  more  effectually 
through  such  means  than  they  are  now  being  executed  by 
some  of  the  servants  he  employs  ;  of  which  The  True 
Presbyterian  is  a  fair  specimen  of  the  "  religious"  press, 
and  indeed  the  only  paper  of  any  denomination  that  we 
know  of  in  all  the  loyal  States  that  is  not  openly  and 
decidedly  sustaining  the  Government  in  its  efforts  to  put 
down  the  rebellion. 

ITS    DISLOYAL    COURSE    IN    GENERAL. 

We  do  not  intend  to  wade  through  the  entire  files  of 
this  paper  for  our  proofs,  but  will  take  a  single  number  of 
a  recent  date  as  a  sample  of  many  more. 

Before  quoting  it,  however,  we  will  simply  note  the 
leading  characteristics  of  the  disloyalty  which  runs 
through  this  paper,  from  the  first  number  to  the  last,  as 
must  be  well  known  to  every  loyal  person  who  reads  it. 

It  started  out  on  the  avowed  principle  that  it  was  going 
to  maintain  a  high  tone  of  spirituality  ;  that  the  necessity 
for  this  arose  from  the  fact  that  the  religious  papers  of  the 
country  had  become  secularized  and  political, — the  best, 
illustrations  for  which  were,  that  they  spoke  out  baldly  in 
opposition  to  the  rebellion,  and  in  support  of  the  (-Jove-ru 
men  t  and  the  war  for  its  suppression, — and  that  ,hj 


THE   CHURCH   VILIFIED    FOE   LOYALTY.  223 

Churches  of  all  denominations  had  become  openly  corrupt 
and  utterly  apostate,  as  seen  in  their  resolutions  and  acts 
adopted  in  support  of  the  Government.  In  this  extraor 
dinary  state  of  religious  degeneracy,  The  True  Presby 
terian  was  going  to  be  strictly  and  purely  "  religious," 
would  abjure  and  eschew  "  politics"  altogether,  and  set  a 
high  example  of  what  a  religious  journal  should  be.  The 
mask  was  soon  thrown  off.  It  is,  and  has  been  from  its 
first  number,  for  a  paper  claiming  to  be  "  religious,"  one 
of  the  most  intensely  political  journals  in  the  country ;  and 
its  politics  are  disloyal  and  treasonable  in  their  spirit, 
tendencies,  terms,  and  intent. 

IT   VILIFIES   THE    CHURCH   FOR   LOYALTY. 

There  is  not  a  branch  of  the  Church  which  has  passed 
resolutions  in  support  of  the  Government  which  it  has  not 
denounced  and  maligned  in  the  most  bitter  and  vile  terms. 
There  is  no  body  of  religionists  in  any  part  of  the  loyal 
States  which  has  manifested  disfavor  with  the  Government 
and  sympathy  with  the  rebellion,  which  it  has  not  held  up 
for  approbation ;  as,  for  example,  that  of  a  Methodist 
congregation  in  the  interior  of  Pennsylvania,  which 
recently  passed  resolutions  against  the  loyal  action  of  the 
General  Conference  of  that  large  and  influential  Church  in 
May  last  in  Philadelphia,  and  that  of  a  Methodist  Conven 
tion  held  in  Louisville,  which  took  action  against  the 
proceedings  of  the  Bishops  of  that  Church.  There  is  not 
a  distinguished  man  in  the  Church  who  has  shown  his 
loyalty  in  his  writings,  nor  a  periodical  that  has  taken  the 
same  course, — especially  those  in  the  Presbyterian  branch, 
— that  has  not  been  blackballed  by  that  sheet  by  name,  in 
terms  that  would  eclipse  a  London  Fish  Market ;  embracing 
such  venerable  names  as  Drs.  Hodge,  Spring,  Breckinridge, 
Juukin,  Musgrave,  and  hosts  of  others,  including  all  the 


224  CLERICAL    DISLOYALTY    IX    LOYAL    STATES. 

editors  of  the  religious  press ;  and  not  a  prominent  man 
in  the  Church  sympathizing  with  treason,  nor  an  insignifi 
cant  one  of  that  character,  has  escaped  its  commendations. 
On  the  other  hand,  while  it  has  often  been  very  earnest  in 
its  exhortations  for  "  peace,"  and  has  continually  denounced 
and  mourned  over  "  this  cruel  war  against  our  SOUTHERN 
brethren," — a  war  begun  by  themselves  for  the  destruction 
of  our  nationality, — and  while  the  ministers  of  the  South 
ern  Church  of  all  branches  have  been  the  foremost  in 
urging  on  the  war  against  the  National  Government,  the 
Constitution,  and  the  Union,  and  many  of  the  more  prom 
inent  of  them  have  held  commissions  as  officers  and  have 
fought  in  the  rebel  army,  no  article  has  ever  appeared  in  that 
paper  whose  object  was  to  condemn  the  wickedness  of  this 
pious  work  of  "  our  Southern  brethren,"  but  many  para 
graphs  are  found  in  its  columns  extenuating  their  course, 
which  were  well  calculated  and  directly  designed  to  give 
them  substantial  "  aid  and  comfort  ;"  while,  also,  some  of 
these  leading  men  have  been  especially  commended  by  name 
for  their  exalted  virtues,  and  held  up  as  models  worthy  of 
imitation  by  all  men.  It  sometimes  waxes  very  warm 
upon  the  question  of  Northern  infraction  of  "  Constitu 
tional  rights,"  but  this  paper  may  be  searched  throughout 
for  a  single  condemnation  of  the  infractions  of  the  Consti- 

O 

tution  by  treason  and  rebellion  which  Southern  men  have 
committed,  and  not  one  such  line  of  condemnation  can  be 
found. 

IT    ABUSES    THE    GOVERNMENT. 

Tn  regard  to  the  General  Government,  whose  flag  pro 
tects  the  property  of  The  True  Presbyterian, — and  under 
whose  jurisdiction  the  "unclean  spirit"  of  the  paper, 
"  walking  through  dry  places,  seeking  rest,"  does  not  find 
it  well  to  reside, — its  course  is  very  similar  to  that  towards 
the  loyal  action  and  loyal  men  of  the  Church.  There  is 


THE    GOVERNMENT    ABUSED.  225 

scarcely  any  thing  which  the  Government  does  towards 
patting  down  the  rebellion  which  it  does  not  condemn. 
We  challenge  the  most  careful  reader  of  that  sheet, 
whether  he  be  loyal  or  a  secessionist,  to  point  to  a  single 
article  it  ever  published,  whose  object  was  to  show 
sympathy  for  the  Government  in  its  contest  with  treason, 
and  that  it  favored  putting  down  the  rebellion  by  any 
means  whatever'  or  that  it  ever  contained  an  editorial  or 
any  other  article,  whose  object  was  to  show  that  the  rebel 
lion  is  wrong,  as  an  offence  against  either  man  or  God  ;  or 
that  its  editor,  Dr.  Robinson,  has  ever  explicitly  stated  in 
that  paper,  that  he  is  not  in  favor  of  the  triumph  of  the 
rebellion  and  of  the  dismemberment  of  the  Union  in  the 
setting  up  of  an  independent  "  Confederacy"  in  the  South, 
— that  he  is  NOT,  heart  and  soul,  in  full  sympathy  with  the 
rebels, — although  the  charges  that  he  is  so  have  been 
frequently  made  against  him  publicly,  and  he  has  been 
challenged  to  deny  them  in  his  columns  in  direct  terms. 

While  this  negative  view  of  the  case  is  sufficient  of 
itself  to  condemn  any  such  editorial  course  in  a  time  of 
rebellion,  and  to  brand  an  editor  who  pursues  it  with 
public  and  open  disloyalty,  the  charge  cannot  be  evaded 
in  this  case  on  any  plea  of  neutrality,  and  that  silence  is 
maintained  for  spirituality's  sake,  and  because  it  is  a  "  re 
ligious"  journal.  On  the  contrary,  this  paper  speaks  out 
openly  against  the  Government ;  against  almost  every 
department  of  it,  civil  and  military ;  against  its  general 
course  and  its  specific  measures  towards  the  rebellion ; 
against  the  acts  of  the  Administration,  and  of  the  War 
Department ;  against  the  Military  Orders  of  the  Govern 
ment  ;  n gainst  the  course  of  its  Commanding  Generals ; 
against  its  interference  with  slavery  in  the  rebel  States; 
against,  indeed,  every  thing  which  it  is  doing  to  put  down 
the  rebellion;  including  abuse  of  it  for  interfering  with 


226  CLERICAL    DISLOYALTY    IN    LOYAL    STATES. 

openly  disloyal  citizens  at  the  North.  As  a  fitting  illustra 
tion  of  this,  it  evinces  its  deep  sympathy  for  treason  and 
traitors,  by  holding  up  as  martyrs  some  whom  the  Govern 
ment  has  laid  hands  upon  to  protect  its  own  safety  and 
the  safety  of  the  people  at  large.  Mr.  Vallandigham  is  a 
special  object  of  its  editorial  compassion,  although  he  was 
condemned  by  a  regular  Military  Court,  which  was  sus 
tained  by  the  United  States  District  Court,  and  again  by 
the  non-interference  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United 
States,  as  well  as  by  the  Executive  of  the  nation,  and 
although  he  was  repudiated  by  the  people  of  Ohio.  While 
making  a  martyr  of  one  thus  judicially  condemned  for 
disloyalty,  it  abuses  most  especially  and  repeatedly  in  its 
columns,  the  upright  and  honored  Judge  who  declined  to 
interfere  with  the  regular  course  of  lawful  authority  in  the 
case. 

The  terms  which  it  employs  to  vent  its  spleen  at  the 
whole  administration  of  the  Government,  civil  and  mili 
tary,  are  fully  equal  to  any  emanations  from  the  secular 
press  at  Richmond,  and  in  many  respects  the  rebel  journals 
of  the  rebel  capital  are  left  far  in  the  rear  in  the  effort  to 
seek  out  phrases  of  treasonable  malignity. 

In  giving  these  general  characteristics  of  The  True 
Presbyterian,  every  loyal  reader  of  the  paper  knows  that 
they  are  fully  maintained  by  the  facts,  and  that,  if  there  is 
any  difference,  our  representation  falls  below  the  truth. 
This  is  the  kind  of  paper  which  is  sustained  by  respectable 
people  in  Kentucky,  some  of  whom  are  loyal ;  sustained 
largely  by  the  Presbyterian  Church,  in  which,  among  the 
ministry  and  people,  are  specimens  of  as  rank  sympathy 
with  the  rebellion  as  can  be  found  in  any  part  of  the 
Union.  Is  it  any  wonder,  with  such  aids  at  home,  that 
the  State  is  overrun  with  rebel  raiders,  under  the  lead  of 
John  Morgan,  "  the  chivalrous  Southern  gentleman,"  as 


SPECIMENS    OP   DISLOYALTY.  227 

refined  ladies  style  him,  and  that  its  loyal  people  are  con 
stantly  harried  and  harassed  in  person  and  property  ? 

SPECIMENS    OP   DISLOYALTY. HIS    POSITION   DEFINED. 

For  an  example  of  many,  we  take  a  single  issue  of  The 
True  Presbyterian,  that  of  March  17,  1864.  One  article 
is  specially  noticeable  in  the  fact,  that  while  Dr.  Robinson 
is  apparently  attempting  to  vindicate  his  loyalty,  he  abuses 
the  Government  in  the  same  breath.  Referring  to  the 
New  York  Observers  remark,  that  it  is  a  "  sin  and  shame 
not  to  be  for  the  Government,"  Dr.  Robinson  says : 

• 

We  are  not  sure  that  we  and  the  Observer  "  understand  the  case  alike" 
here,  as  President  Lincoln  says.  If  he  mean  by  "  Government"  the 
Constitution,  and  official  acts  of  the  Administration  according  to  the  Con 
stitution,  then  we  have  given  stronger  proof  of  loyalty  than  the  Ob 
server.  For  though  maligned,  insulted,  and  robbed,  by  minions  of  the 
Administration,  we  have  steadfastly  withstood  the  temptation  to  swerve 
from  our  fidelity  in  "  word  or  conduct"  to  the  Government.  But  if,  by 
"the  Government,"  the  Observer  means  an  Administration  in  the  hands 
of  cut-throat  abolition  infidels,  setting  at  defiance  alike  the  ordinance  of  God 
and  the  Constitution  of  the  country,  THEN  WE  ARE  "NOT  FOR  THE  GOV 
ERNMENT,"  whatever  "  sin  and  shame"  inay  be  involved  in  it. 

This  is  sufficiently  plain  as  denning  his  position.  It  em 
braces  the  essence  of  the  usual  resort  of  traitors,  who 
sometimes  attempt  to  distinguish  between  the  "  Govern 
ment,"  and  the  "Administration"  in  which,  for  the  time 
being,  all  the  authority,  dignity,  and  power  of  the  Govern 
ment  are  embodied.  It  qualifies  this,  however,  by  the 
distinction  between  the  Government  constitutionally  and 
unconstitutionally  administered, — a  very  palpable  dis 
tinction.  And  then, — passing  by  the  official  and  authori 
tative  decisions  of  every  department  of  the  Government, 
Executive,  Legislative,  and  Judicial,  in  which  they  have 
been  agreed  on  all  questions  which  have  been  acted  upon 
11 


228  CLERICAL   DISLOYALTY    IN    LOYAL    STATES. 

by  them  respectively  touching  the  rebellion  and  the  war, 
— Dr.  Robinson  takes  upon  himself  to  be  sole  j:idge  in 
the  matter,  and  to  decide  on  his  individual  responsibility 
that  the  Government  is  acting  unconstitutionally,  "  set 
ting  aside  the  Constitution  of  the  country,"  and  therefore 
openly  announces,  " we  are  not  for  the  Government"  If 
this  is  not  disloyalty,  it  would  be  difficult  to  define  the 
term. 

The  spur  of  his  zeal  for  Constitutional  liberty,  is  his 
devotion  to  negro  slavery.  To  deify  and  sanctify  the 
right  to  enslave  four  millions  of  human  beings,  who  have 
an  infinitely  clearer  right  to  liberty  before  the  bar  of 
justice,  than  he  has  to  his  personal  freedom  before  the 
laws  of  the  country  he  is  betraying,  The  True  Presbyterian 
is  largely  devoted ;  and  he  deems  it  God-service  to  abuse 
the  Government  because  it  has  stopped  the  mouths  of  a 
few  prominent  men,  who,  like  himself,  were  acting  in 
sympathy  with  those  who  are  in  arms  to  overthrow  it.  It 
is  not  difficult,  therefore,  to  select  the  term  out  of  the  phrase 
in  which  he  characterizes  the  rulers  of  the  country, — "  cut 
throat  abolition  infidels," — which  most  of  all  expresses  the 
depth  of  his  soul's  abhorrence. 

In  the  same  article  from  which  we  have  quoted,  Dr. 
Robinson  further  shows  his  contempt  for  "the  powers  that 
be,"  by  speaking  of  some  of  the  Generals  in  the  army  high 
est  in  rank  as  "  petty  military  despots,''  and  of  their  "  rule" 
as  being  "  instigated  by  the  canaille  of  the  neighborhood ;" 
and  of  the  head  of  the  Department  of  War,  as  "  that  emi 
nent  father  in  God,  Secretary  Stanton ;"  and  elsewhere,  so 
exact  are  his  rebel  instincts,  that  he  foils  into  rebel  phra 
seology  aptly,  when  characterizing  General  Butler  as 
"  Beast  Butler,"  and  other  leading  Generals  of  the  army 
as  "  military  satraps,"  and  much  more  of  the  same  sort, 
found  in  every  number. 


GOD'S    CUESE    WITH    THE    PRESIDENT.  229 


GOD'S  "  CURSE"  WITH  THE   PRESIDENT. 

Another  instance  revealing  his  strong  rebel  leanings  in 
the  paper  of  the  same  date, — for  all  our  extended  extracts 
are  confined  to  one  number, — is  seen  in  an  editorial  in 
which  he  objects  to  the  course  of  certain  religious  gentle 
men,  wherein  he  takes  occasion  to  draw  a  comparison 
between  preceding  administrations  of  the  Government  and 
the  present  one,  much  to  the  disparagement  of  the  latter, 
in  this  style : 

Under  the  thirteen  preceding  Presidents,  God's  blessing  seemed  to 
rest  upon  the  nation  from  generation  to  generation,  while  His  awful  curse 
comes  with  Mr.  Lincoln.  We  are  free  to  say,  wicked  as  we  no  doubt 
will  seem  to  these  holy  men,  that  judging  from  the  history  of  our  coun 
try,  while  "we  as  a  nation  had  no  religion,"  we  were  far  better  off  than 
now,  with  all  the  religion  that  Mr.  Lincoln's  official  piety  has  infused  into 
the  nalion.  As  '•  a  nation  with  no  religion,"  we  had  generally  peace 
and  quietness — faithful  observance  of  public  covenants — respect  for  the 
amenities  of  civil  and  social  intercourse  between  all  sections  of  the  land 
— unparalleled  success  in  all  secular  enterprise,  and  marvellous  suc 
cess  in  all  our  efforts  for  the  advancement  of  Christ's  kingdom. 7  As  a 
nation  with  a  religion,  in  spite  of  Presidential  fastings  and  prayers  and 
thanksgivings,  we  are  rapidly  verging  to  barbarism,  the  land  filled  with 
rapine  and  blood,  &c. 

These  comparisons  are  understood.  Under  all  former 
administrations,  "  public  covenants"  were  scrupulously 
kept;  under  the  "curse"  of  Mr.  Lincoln  and  his  "official 
piety,"  they  are  broken.  Under  former  Presidents,  proper 
"  civil  and  social  amenities"  were  shown  toward  "  our 
Southern  brethren ;"  but  now,  poor  souls,  they  are  treated 
very  uncivilly  with  shell  and  canister  for  their  pious  offer 
ings  on  the  altar  of  treason.  Under  Presidents  Pierce  and 
Buchanan,  when,  through  their  peculiarly  "  faithful  obser 
vance  of  public  covenants,"  slavery  had  a  fair  prospect  of 
becoming  universal  in  the  country, — either  by  importing 


230  CLERICAL   DISLOYALTY   IN   LOYAL   STATES. 

more  Africans,  or  enslaving,  as  the  amiable  Dr.  Armstrong 
would  have  it,  all  the  "  poor  whites," — we  had  "  unpar 
alleled  success  in  all  secular  enterprise,"  and  cotton  was 
to  reign  over  all  nations ;  but  now,  under  the  "  awful  curse 
that  comes  with  Mr.  Lincoln,"  gold  goes  up  and  greenbacks 
go  down,  and  as  for  the  great  Apostles  of  the  rebellion 
among  "  our  Southern  brethren,"  their  idol  king  is  de 
throned  and  they  are  reduced  to  quite  an  apostolic  condi  - 
tion,  as  many  of  them  have  "  neither  gold,  nor  silver,  nor 
brass,  in  their  purses,  neither  two  coats,  nor  shoes,"  and 
as  for  their  "  scrip,"  it  has  long  since  gone  down  far  below 
zero.  Under  former  Presidents,  when  it  was  orthodox  to 
preach  up  the  divinity  of  slavery,  and  when  it  was  sin, 
"  infidelity  and  apostasy,"  to  preach  or  resolve  against  it, 
"  Christ's  kingdom"  had  a  most  "  marvellous  success ;" 
but  now,  under  "  Mr.  Lincoln's  official  piety,"  when  the 
country  is  ready  to  throw  off  the  incubus  of  slavery,  "  we 
are  rapidly  verging  to  barbarism."  •  These  may  be  en 
titled  "  The  Pious  Lamentations  of  Stuart  Robinson,"  and 
will  do  to  keep  company  with  the  "  Sorrows  of  Werter." 

THE  WAR  CHARGED  ON  NORTHERN  MEN. 

We  give  two  extracts  more  from  the  same  number  of 
the  paper,  contributed  by  other  writers.  We  cannot  vouch 
for  the  correctness  of  the  writer's  quotations  in  the  first 
extract,  except  in  one  instance,  but  we  give  them  as  we 
here  find  them.  He  is  mourning  over  the  war,  and  charg 
ing  the  responsibility  for  its  sad  events  upon  the  men  he 
names.  It  shows  on  which  side  his  own  heart  is, — that 
of  the  rebellion  or  the  Government : 

How  naturally  the  poor  dying  soldier  might  claim,  that  in  a  very  ac 
ceptable  manner  he  must  have  been  serving  God,  while  employed  in 
butchering  rebels  I  Could  he  not  refer  to  the  calmest  utterances  of  the 
most  eminent  of  the  so-called  conservative  preachers  of  the  land,  repre- 


DENUNCIATIONS    OP    OUR    GOVERNMENT.  231 

sentative  men  of  by  far  the  largest  part  of  the  Presbyterian  Church, 
that  the  war  is,  on  the  Federal -side,  a  just,  a  necessary,  and  a  holy  ivar? 
Did  not  the  learned  and  able  Rev.  George  Junkin,  D.  D.,  on  the  floor  of 
the  General  Assembly,  in  1862,  unrebuked  by  that  Assembly,  declare, 
that  "the  present  rebellion  is  a  hell-born  delusion,  an  ungodly,  wicked 
delusion ;  th£  present  war  was  founded  in  treason,  in  deception  the 
most  terrible  that  ever  was  on  earth,  except  the  deception  in  Eden  ?" 
Did  not  the  meek  and  gentle  Eev.  S.  I.  Prime,  D.  D.,  editor  of  the  New 
York  Observer,  write  in  his  paper  in  May,  1862,  that  no  punishment  in 
this  world  or  the  next  was  severe  enough  for  those  Southern  traitors? 
Did  not  the  amiable  and  fearless  Professor  in  the  Danville  Theological 
Seminary,  even  Rev.  Robert  L.  Stanton,  D  D.,  deliberately  characterize 
this  Southern  movement — so  written  in  the  Danvilk  Review, — as  "  the 
most  wicked  and  causeless  attempt  to  overthrow  good  government 
which  has  ever  been  made  since  the  rebellion  of  the  angels  which 
kept  not  their  first  estate  ?"  Did  not  the  sober  and  earnest  Rev.  George 
"W.  Musgrave,  D.  D.,  long  a  Secretary  of  the  Board  of  Domestic  Missions, 
tell  the  Almighty  in  his  public  prayer,  in  the  hearing  of  assembled  thou 
sands,  as  met  at  the  second  anniversary  of  the  Christian  Commission, 
in  Philadelphia,  January  28,  1864,  that  "the  treason  of  the  rebels  is  a 
crime  against  their  country  not  only,  but  a  crime  against  the  Almighty 
Himself;  that  they  are  resisting  His  servants,  His  divine,  established 
ordinances?" 

The  article  from  which  the  above  is  taken,  is  headed 
"  Who  slew  all  these  ?"  The  writer  indicates  his  answer, 
which  shows  that  he  relieves  "our  Southern  brethren" 
from  the  responsibility. 

OUR  GOVERNMENT  WORSE    THAN   FRENCH    REVOLUTIONISTS. 

The  only  further  reference  we  make,  is  to  an  article  in 
which  the  writer  draws  a  comparison  between  the  French 
Government,  in  the  Revolution  of  1793,  and  the  General 
Government  of  the  present  time,  and  strives  to  make  out 
a  case  most  decidedly  in  favor  of  the  French.  He  quotes 
at  great  length  from  a  discourse  of  Dr.  Timothy  Dwight, 
of  Yale  College,  delivered  in  1812,  upon  Infidelity.  Speak 
ing  of  the  French,  Dr.  Dwight  says  : 


CLERICAL    DISLOYALTY    IN   LOYAL    STATES. 

They  raised  armies,  in  different  years,  amounting  to  five,  seven,  nine, 
and  twelve  hundred  thousand  men:  "the  strongest  and  most  formida 
ble  body  which  was  ever  assembled  on  this  globe."  This  multitude 
they  emptied  out  upon  every  neighboring  State.  The  life,  liberty,  and 
property  of  every  bordering  nation  was  consumed;  and  a  boundless 
scene  of  desolation  everywhere  marked  its  course.  It  made  no  differ 
ence  whether  the  nation  was  a  friend  or  a  foe,  was  in  alliance  with 
them,  or  at  war.  "Whatever  was  thought  convenient  for  France,  was 
done  ;  and  done  in  defiance  of  every  law  of  Cod  or  man ;  of  the  most 
solemn  treaties,  of  the  most  absolute  promises. 

This  is  but  a  small  portion  of  the  extract,  and  although 
we  have  not  verified  it,  we  presume  it  is  correctly  taken 
from  Dwight's  works.  Upon  the  whole  extract,  as  he  gives 
it,  the  writer  says,  referring  to  the  course  of  the  United 
States  Government,  and  those  who  support  it  in  putting 
down  the  rebellion : 

In  making  this  quotation,  it  is  not  my  purpose,  Mr.  Editor,  to  enlarge 
upon  the  similarity  of  the  events  and  doings  of  the  French  Revolution, 
and  those  of  our  own  land  and  day.  "Were  your  columns  the  proper 
place  (how  scrupulous!),  it  would  be  no  difficult  task  to  show  a  most 
striking  resemblance  in  the  events  and  doings  of  the  two  countries  and 
times.  Indeed,  it  could  be  demonstrated,  that,  taking  all  things  into 
consideration,  the  wickedness  and  crimes  of  the  fanatical  infidels,  and 
their  adherents  of  our  day,  far  exceed  in  atrocity  and  enormity  those  of 
the  time  of  the  French  Revolution.  *  *  *  Like  their  elder  brethren 
the  infidels  of  France,  they  (the  "  Gospel  ministers  and  Christians  in  the 
Northern  States")  have  allowed  an  adoration  of  our  NATIONAL  UNITY, 
greatness  and  glory,  equality  and  fraternity,  to  supplant  in  their  hearts 
the  adoration  of  the  Prince  of  Peace  ;  and  principles  and  precepts  of 
corrupt  humanity  to  rule  their  actions,  instead  of  the  principles  and 
precepts  of  the  Gospel  of  God. 

It  is  only  necessary  to  observe,  in  reference  to  the  above, 
thit  the  character  drawn  by  the  graphic  pen  of  Dr.  Dwight 
of  the  ruling  party  in  France,  led  by  Robespierre,  Danton, 
and  their  confreres,  is  held  up  by  this  writer  as  furnishing 
a  good  picture  of  the  character  of  the  Government  of  the 


CALUMNY    SELF-REFUTED.  233 

United  States  and  its  supporters  in  the  present  war  against 
rebellion,  except  that  "  the  wickedness  and  crimes"  of  the 
latter  "  far  exceed  in  atrocity  and  enormity  those  of  the 
time  of  the  French  Revolution." 

CHARGE    OF   DISLOYALTY   SUSTAINED. 

It  may  be  thought  that  we  have  given  far  too  much 
attention  to  the  course  of  a  single  paper.  Our  apology  is, 
that  it  is  probably  the  only  paper  claiming  to  be  "  reli 
gious,"  within  the  loyal  portion  of  the  country,  which  is  not 
friendly  to  the  Government ;  that  it  is  published  and  mainly 
circulated  in  a  State  which  has  repeatedly  voted  against 
secession,  and  which  is  at  this  moment,  and  has  frequently 
been  since  the  beginning  of  the  war,  overrun  by  guerrillas 
who  are  laying  waste  the  country,  and  that  the  course  of 
this  sheet  is  well  calculated  to  give  "  aid  and  comfort"  to 
this  mode  of  rebel  warfare. 

And  now  we  ask,  can  any  candid  man  read  the  evidence 
we  have  adduced  in  the  foregoing  extracts, — all  taken  from 
a  single  number  of  the  paper, — and  say  that  The  True 
Presbyterian  is  not  a  disloyal  print  ? — that  its  editor,  pub 
lishers,  and  correspondents,  are  not  inimical  to  the  Gov 
ernment  which  protects  their  homes,  and  that  their  inner 
most  souls  are  not  in  full  sympathy  with  rebels  in  arms 
who  are  seeking  to  overthrow  it?  No  jury  of  twelve 
honest  men  could  hesitate  to  bring  in  a  verdict  of  guilty. 

CALUMNY    SELF-REFUTED. 

This  paper  and  certain  secular  prints  from  which  it  often 
quotes,  denounce  the  Government  for  its  tyranny  and  op 
pression,  for  its  interference  with  the  liberty  of  person, 
speech,  and  the  press.  Dr.  Robinson  says  of  himself,  in 
the  first  extract  given,  that  he  has  been  "  maligned,  insult 
ed,  and  robbed,  by  minions  of  the  Administration."  The 


234  CLERICAL    DISLOYALTY    IN    LOYAL    STATES. 

reply  to  this  is  unanswerable.  The  simple  fact  that  such 
men  and  such  papers  are  permitted  to  live  and  labor  to 
thwart  the  Government  and  to  aid  the  rebellion,  is  an 
overwhelming  disproof  of  its  oppression.  If  the  Govern 
ment  were  really  acting  with  stern  justice,  they  would 
never  more  be  permitted  to  trouble  it.  If  they  were  pur 
suing  such  a  course  at  Richmond,  they  would  instantly 
have  a  lodgment  in  Castle  Thunder,  or  be  hung  by  the 
neck — or  the  heels.  This  they  well  know.  It  would  bo 
no  better  with  them  if  they  were  doing  their  traitorous 
work  in  Paris  or  London.  There  is  no  nation  under  heaven, 
but  that  of  the  United  States,  where  such  things  would  be 
tolerated  for  a  moment  in  a  time  of  foul  rebellion,  while 
possessing  the  power  which  this  nation  has  developed. 
And  yet,  the  Government  is  maligned  as  oppressive !  The 
very  paragraph  which  contains  the  calumny  is  its  own 
refutation. 

THE    REMEDY. TWO    EXAMPLES. 

If  such  is  the  guilt,  what  is  the  remedy  ?  We  have 
already  indicated  what  would  be  done  elsewhere.  But  we 
incline  to  the  opinion  that  the  Government  would  act 
wisely  to  allow  such  prints  to  go  on  unmolested ;  though 
many  think  differently.  They  unquestionably  exert  a  pow 
erful  influence  against  the  Government,  and  give  to  the 
rebel  cause  substantial  "  aid"  and  much  needed  "  comfort." 
But  they  serve  at  least  two  good  purposes.  They  afford 
to  the  world  the  best  illustration  of  the  leniency  of  the 
Government ;  and  they  give  striking  examples  of  the  depth 
of  human  depravity.  Both  of  these  may  have  an  impor 
tant  end  to  serve  in  the  development  and  final  elevation 
of  mankind. 

An  example  may  be  given,  however,  of  a  remedy  which 
eminent  statesmen  of  a  Border  State  approve.  The  Mary- 


THE    EEMEDY. — TWO    EXAMPLES.  235 

land  Constitutional  State  Convention,  July  19,  1864, 
passed  the  following  order,  by  a  vote  of  thirty-three  to 
seventeen : 

Ordered,  That  this  Convention,  representing  the  people  of  Maryland, 
hereby  respectfully  request  the  President  of  the  United  States,  and  the 
Commandants  of  Military  Departments  in  which  Maryland  is  included, 
as  an  act  of  justice  and  propriety,  to  assess  upon  sympathizers  with  the 
rebellion  resident  in  this  State,  the  total  amount  of  all  losses  and  spolia 
tions  sustained  by  loyal  citizens  of  the  United  States  resident  in  this 
State,  by  reason  of  the  recent  rebel  raid,  to  compensate  loyal  sufferers. 

It  is  as  clear  as  the  light,  that  these  raiders  in  the  loyal 
Border  States  are  encouraged  by  the  sympathizers  with  the 
rebellion  therein ;  sometimes  by  secret  organizations,  which 
the  President's  Proclamation  of  Martial  Luw  in  Kentucky 
declares,  upon  the  authority  of  military  men  and  others,  to 
exist  in  that  State ;  sometimes  by  information  given  to 
them  ;  and  powerfully  by  the  disloyal  presses  in  the  Border 
States.  Through  these  means,  the  raiding  parties,  and 
especially  those  guerrilla  bands  that  are  nothing  more  than 
highway  robbers  and  land  pirates,  are  emboldened  in  their 
work.  The  Maryland  Convention  has  expressed  its  solemn 
judgment,  proposing  a  remedy.  At  the  very  time  that 
State  was  thus  suffering,  and  the  national  capital  was  threat 
ened,  raiding  parties  were  laying  waste  Kentucky,  through 
encouragement  given  by  "  their  friends"  at  home.  If  the 
remedy  suggested  by  a  body  of  eminent  statesmen,  is  "  an 
act  of  justice  and  propriety"  for  the  longitude  of  Mary 
land,  it  would  be  no  less  so  for  that  of  Kentucky.  If  the 
rule  were  applied  there,  many  men,  now  rolling  in  wealth, 
who  have  aided  John  Morgan,  and  ladies  who  have  kissed 
his  hand  and  wept  tears  of  joy  over  his  photograph,  would 
be  made  penniless.  If,  under  this  "  act  of  justice,"  that 
quality  were  meted  out  in  the  manner  proposed,  and  the 
guilty  were  rewarded  "  according  to  their  works."  the  edi- 
11* 


236  CLERICAL   DISLOYALTY   IN   LOYAL   STATES. 

tors,  publishers,  and  correspondents  of  The  True  Presby 
terian  would  be  reduced  to  beggary. 

Another  example  is  found  in  what  the  papers  state,  that 
Major-General  Bui-bridge,  commanding  in  Kentucky,  has 
lately  issued  an  order  similar  in  principle  to  that  recom 
mended  by  the  Maryland  Convention,  and  even  going 
much  farther  in  retaliatory  measures.  We  have  not  seen 
it,  and  cannot  speak  of  its  provisions ;  but  if  founded  on 
"justice  and  propriety,"  as  we  presume  is  the  case,  it  may 
turn  out  that  editors  and  others  who  are  sowing  broadcast 
those  seeds  which  produce  such  a  harvest  of  desolation 
and  blood  through  the  fair  fields  of  Kentucky,  may  yet 
receive  their  deserts  in  the  visitations  which  will  be  made 
upon  their  persons  and  property. 

GOVERNMENT    ORDERS    VINDICATED. 

It  will  be  appropriate,  at  this  point,  to  notice  one  of  the 
grossest  charges  which  the  "  religious"  journal  above 
named  has  brought  against  the  Government,  and  against 
every  branch  of  the  Northern  Church.  On  application  to 
the  War  Department,  by  the  Bishops  of  the  Methodist 
Episcopal  Church,  and  by  Missionary  Boards  of  the  Bap 
tist,  Presbyterian,  and  other  churches  at  the  North, 
for  permission  to  occupy  the  pulpits  and  vacant  neighbor 
hoods  of  the  Rebel  States,  that  the  Gospel  might  be 
preached,  the  Government  granted  these  requests,  regard 
ing  the  commission  given  by  these  several  Church  author 
ities  as  a  guarantee  that  the  men  sent  South  would  be 
loyal,  and  imposing  no  other  condition.  Orders  were 
issued  to  the  different  military  commanders  to  give  persons 
thus  duly  commissioned  by  the  Church,  all  proper  facili 
ties  for  their  work,  and  to  put  the  pulpits  at  their  disposal. 
The  Generals  in  command  issued  their  orders  accord 
ingly. 


GOVERNMENT    ORDERS    VINDICATED.  237 

This  proceeding  on  the  part  of  the  Government  has 
been  denounced  by  the  above-named  paper  ;  and  that  the 
Church  should  seek  such  authority  from  the  State,  has 
been  paraded  as  one  of  the  conclusive  proofs  of  its  utter 
apostasy.  At  least  one  religious  body,  the  Presbytery  of 
Louisville,  complained  to  the  General  Assembly  of  the 
Church  that  its  Board  of  Missions  should  thus  seek  to 
have  the  commissions  of  its  ministers  indorsed  by  the 
State ;  and,  in  this  course,  it  saw  nothing  but  shame  and 
"  ruin"  impending.  It  is  in  regard  to  these  measures  par 
ticularly,  that  Dr.  Robinson  speaks  so  contemptuously  of 
the  Secretary  of  War,  and  of  the  orders  of  certain  mili 
tary  commanders.  In  the  same  number  of  his  paper  be 
fore  quoted,  he  speaks  of  "  Secretary  Stanton's  letter  in 
stalling  Bishop  Ames  as  Military  Pontiff  in  a  vast  district, 
and  the  infamous  Norfolk  order  of  Gen.  Wild  ;"  and  also 
has  the  following : 

What  though  Methodist  and  Baptist  Mohammedans  grasp  the  sword 
offered  them  by  that  "  eminent  Father  in  God,"  Secretary  Stanton,  to 
drive  back  their  Southern  brethren  into  the  fold  out  of  which  Northern 
faithlessness  to  covenants  and  semi-infidel  opinions  had  driven  them 
twenty  years  ago.  *  *  *  We  had  fondly  hoped  that  so  far  as 
Churches  are  concerned,  this  disgrace  might  be  confined  to  Northern 
Methodists  and  Baptists.  To  our  mortification,  and  the  disgrace  of  our 
own  Church,  we  find  the  (Philadelphia)  Presbyterian,  a  journal  that  will 
be  understood  to  speak  for  Presbyterians  because  it  once  did, — for  the 
public  at  large  will  not  understand  its  miserable  fall, — proposing  that 
the  Presbyterian  Board  of  Missions  should  apply  to  the  War  Depart 
ment  for  an  order  similar  to  the  Methodist  order  1  We  have  little  fear 
that  this  Board  will  adopt  the  suggestion.  Even  should  it  be  so  run 
mad,  the  Church  would  be  apt  to  stop  supplies  till  a  saner  Board  were 
put  in  its  place. 

The  Board  here  referred  to  did  "apply  to  the  War  De 
partment  for  an  order,"  and  obtained  it,  and  if  not  entirely 
"  similar  to  the  Methodist  order,"  it  is  nevertheless  based 


238  CLERICAL    DISLOYALTY    IN   LOYAL    STATES. 

on  the  essential  principle  which  underlies  the  whole  case 
as  between  the  Church  and  the  State  ;  and  it  is  in  regard 
to  that  principle,  chiefly,  that  we  now  refer  to  the  case. 
It  is  in  reference  to  this  latter  application  that  the  Louis 
ville  Presbytery  complained  ;  and  it  need  only  be  said 
here,  in  contradiction  to  the  above  prophecy,  that  the 
General  Assembly,  in  May  last,  did  not  elect  "  a  saner 
Board,"  but  approved  and  sustained  its  course. 

The  order  from  the  War  Department  to  the  Methodist 
Bishops,  and  that  of  General  Wild,  are  before  us.  We 
see  nothing  "  infamous"  in  either,  although  both  are  so 
styled.  In  the  first,  "  transportation  and  subsistence"  are 
to  be  furnished  "Bishop  Ames  and  his  clerk,  when  it  can 
be  done  without  prejudice  to  the  service."  This  is  mostly 
an  affair  of  the  Government,  and  is  of  minor  consideration. 
In  that  of  General  Wild,  it  was  ordered  that  the  Churches 
should  be  "  open  freely  to  all  officers  and  soldiers,  white 
or  colored,"  &c.  Perhaps  the  infamy  is  found  in  the 
hue  of  the  skin.  But  these,  as  we  have  said,  are  subor 
dinate  matters.  We  only  desire  to  look  at  the  radical 
principle  at  the  bottom  of  these  cases,  as  furnishing  or  not 
a  just  ground  of  complaint,  to  say  nothing  of  vile  abuse, 
both  of  the  Church  and  the  Government.* 

*  That  the  reader  may  see  the  two  orders  referred  to,  each  of  which  is  pronounced 
"infamous,"  we  here  insert  them  as  found  in  The  True  Presbyterian  of  March  IT, 
1864: 

"  WAK  DEPARTMENT,  ADJUTANT-GENERAL'S  OFFICE, 
"WASHINGTON,  November  30,  1863. 

"To  the  Generals  commanding  the  Departments  of  the  Missouri,  the  Tennessee, 
and  the  Gulf,  and  all  Generals  and  Officers  commanding  armies,  detachments,  and 
corps,  and  posts,  and  all  Officers  in  the  service  of  the  United  States  in  the  above- 
mentioned  Departments :  You  are  hereby  directed  to  place  at  the  disposal  of  Rev. 
Bishop  Ames,  all  houses  of  worship  belonging  to  the  Methodist  Episcopal  Church 
South,  in  which  a  loyal  minister,  who  lias  been  appointed  by  a  loyal  Bishop  of  said 
Church,  does  not  now  officiate.  It  is  a  matter  of  great  importance  to  the  Govern 
ment,  in  its  efforts  to  restore  tranquillity  to  the  community  and  peace  to  the  nation, 
that  Christian  ministers  should,  by  example  and  precept,  support  and  foster  the 
loyal  sentiment  of  ihe  people.  Bishop  Ames  enjoys  the  entire  confidence  of  this 
Department,  and  no  doubt  is  entertained  that  all  ministers  who  may  be  appointed 
by  him  will  he  entirely  loyal.  Y  on  are  expected  to  give  him  all  tue  aid.  countenance, 
and  support,  practicable  in  the  execution  of  his  important  mission.  You  are  also 
authorized  and  directed  to  furnish  Bishop  Ames  and  his  clerk  with  transportation 


CHURCH    APPLICATION   VINDICATED.  239 

What  is  here  involved  ?  Here  is  no  union  of  Church 
and  State,  as  some  have  "pretended ;  no  subordination  of 
the  Church  to  the  Government,  out  of  its  proper  sphere,  nor 
of  the  Government  to  the  Church ;  no  "  indorsing"  by  the 
Government  of  a  minister's  "  commission  to  preach  the 
Gospel ;"  no  improper  position  for  the  Church  at  the 
North  to  take;  and  no  injustice  to  the  Church  at  the 
{South,  so  far  as  it  is  in  rebellion,  as  to  rights  of  property, 
organization,  or  spiritual  teachers. 

CHURCH    APPLICATION   VINDICATED    BY   THE   FACTS. 

In  regard  to  the  action  of  the  Church  at  the  North,  its 
several  branches  have  applied  to  the  War  Department  for 
a  "  permit"  or  a  "  passport,"  that  their  ministers  might  go 
within  the  lines  of  the  army,  and  occupy  the  vacant  pul 
pits  of  the  South,  from  some  of  which  disloyal  ministers 
had  fled  within  the  rebel  lines,  and  from  others  of  which 
they  had  been  ejected  by  the  Government.  In  its  essence, 
this  is  all  that  the  application  involves.  And  what  is  it  ?  It 
is  precisely  similar,  and  nothing  more,  than  the  permission 
which  is  sought  and  obtained  from  the  War,  Treasury, 
Navy,  and  State  Departments,  for  citizens  to  exercise 
their  business,  trade,  or  profession,  of  a  secular  character, 

and  subsistence,  when  it  can  be  done  without  prejudice  to  the  service,  and  will 

afford  them  courtesy,  assistance,  and  protection.     By  order  of  the  Secretary  of  War. 

"E.  D.  TOWNSEND,  Assistant  Adjutant-General" 

"  HEAD-QUARTERS,  NORFOLK  AND  PORTSMOUTH, 

"  NORFOLK,  VA.,  Feb.  11,  1864. 

"  General  Orders,  No.  3. — All  places  of  public  worship  in  Norfolk  and  Ports 
mouth  are  hereby  placed  under  the  control  of  the  Provost-Marshals  of  Norfolk  and 
Ports  nouth  respectively,  who  shall  see  the  pulpits  properly  filled  by  displacing, 
when  necessary,  the  present  incumbents,  and  substituting  men  of  known  loyalty 
and  the  same  sectarian  denomination,  either  military  or  civil,  subject  to  the 
approval  of  the  Commanding  General.  They  shall  see  that  the  Churches  are  open 
freely  to  all  officers  and  soldiers,  white  or  colored,  at  the  usua'  hour  of  worship,  and 
at  other  times,  if  desired,  and  they  shall  see  that  no  insult  or  indignity  be  offered  to 
them,  either  by  word,  look,  or  gesture,  on  the.part  of  the  congregation.  The  neces 
sary  expenses  will  be  levied,  as  far  as  possible,  in  accordance  with  the  previous 
usages  or  regulations  of  each  congregation  respectively.  No  property  shall  be  re 
moved,  either  public  or  private,  without  peruiis-siun  from  these  head-quarters.  By 
command  of  UE.  A.  WILD,  Brig.-GeneraL"' 


240  CLERICAL    DISLOYALTY    IX    LOYAL    STATES. 

within  the  "  seceded"  States,  or  within  the  lines  of  the 
Federal  army,  or  to  go  there  at  all  for  any  purpose  /  the 
conditions  being  that  the  business,  in  the  judgment  of  the 
Government,  shall  be  proper  in  itself,  and  warranted  by 
the  circumstances  of  the  case  and  the  state  of  the  country, 
and  that  the  persons  concerned  in  it  shall  be  loyal. 

The  Church  looked  at  the  simple  facts,  that  many 
Southern  pulpits  were  vacant,  and  that  others  would 
become  so  as  our  armies  should  advance ;  that  Southern 
ministers  had  abandoned  and  had  been  driven  from  their 
positions;  and  that  the  Government  would  not  allow  any 
but  loyal  men  to  fill  their  places.  Besides  this,  tens  of 
thousands  of  freedmen,  women,  and  children,  were  as 
"sheep  without  a  shepherd."  The  Gospel,  therefore, 
would  not  be  preached  at  all  to  multitudes  of  people, 
white  and  black,  many  of  whom  were  loyal,  and  would 
gladly  welcome  it,  unless  the  Government  should  open 
the  way.  Under  these  circumstances,  was  the  Church 
doing  wrong  or  right  in  asking  the  sanction  of  the 
Government, — obtaining  a  "  permit,"  for  it  was  no  more 
than  that,  and  just  what  is  sometimes  done  on  heathen 
ground, — to  "  go  into  all  the  South  and  preach  the  Gospel 
to  every  creature  ?"  Looking  at  the  facts  alone,  it  is 
clear  that  the  Church  at  the  North  has  done  nothing 
more  than  her  duty.  Had  she  not  done  it,  she  would 
have  been  verily  guilty  before  God,  and  the  blood  of 
multitudes  of  souls  would  have  been  found  upon  her. 
We  do  not  say  what  might  or  might  not  have  been  the 
duty  of  the  Church,  in  this  case,  had  the  application  been 
denied.  It  is  not  necessary  to  raise  any  question  of  the 
Church's  duty  to  preach  the  Gospel,  even  in  the  face  of 
opposition  from  the  civil  power.  That  has  nothing  to  do 
with  the  present  issue.  This,  however,  may  be  said,  as  a 
principle  universally  applicable, — that,  if  the  civil  power  is 


CHIEF    GROUND    OF    COMPLAINT.  241 

opposed  to  the  Church's  proper  work,  the  Church  should 
seek  to  conciliate  rather  than  disregard  such  opposition. 
In  this  case,  we  simply  look  at  the  facts  as  they  are. 
The  Church  could  not  send  men  South  to  preach  without 
pel-mission  of  the  Government,  or  provoking  its  hostility. 
It  was,  then,  its  duty  to  ask  permission  to  go  within  the 
lines  of  the  army,  and,  if  granted,  to  accept  it,  provided 
the  work  itself  was  proper.  The  actual  condition  of  the 
South  reveals  the  duty,  and  the  application  vindicates  the 
Church  in  seeking  to  discharge  it  in  a  way  not  to  provoke 
collision  with  the  Government. 

CHIEF    GROUND    OF    COMPLAINT. 

But  suppose  the  Church,  looking  beyond  the  facts, 
should  entertain  the  question,  whether  she  might  not,  in 
this  course,  be  conniving  at  a  great  wrong  done  by  the 
Government  to  the  Southern  people ;  how  would  her  con 
duct  be  affected  ?  This  brings  up  the  other  side  of  the 
case.  It  is  no  doubt  here  that  The  True  Presbyterian, 
and  those  who  agree  »vith  it,  found  their  great  objection, 
denying  that  the  Government  has  any  right  to  take  pos 
session  of  the  Southern  Churches,  or  turn  them  over  to 
loyal  men  from  the  North  or  elsewhere;  and  that  the 
Church,  in  asking  and  accepting  this  from  the  Govern 
ment,  is  guilty  of  compounding  a  felony  with  the  State. 
Dr.  Robinson  speaks  as  follows  upon  this  point : 

When  the  Administration,  or  any  of  its  functionaries,  obtrudo 
themselves  into  the  affairs  of  religion,  and  undertake  to  direct  the 
affairs  of  Christ's  kingdom,  from  which  they  are  restrained  both  by  the 
law  of  Christ  and  the  Constitution  of  the  country,  we  are  obliged  to 
treat  them  as  any  other  false  teachers  and  usurpers  in  the  Christian 
commonwealth.  *  *  *  It  comes  to  settling  the  powers  of  civil  and 
military  government  over  religion.  *  *  *  The  people  of  the  country 
will  surely  be  slow  to  recognize  such  powers  over  religion  in  this 
Government ;  for  who  knows  how  soon  the  order  may  be  extended  to 


242  CLERICAL    DISLOYALTY    IN   LOYAL    STATES. 

embrace   Ohio,   New  York,  and   Pennsylvania,  as  well  as   Missouri, 
Tennessee,  etc.  ? 

When  the  cases  become  similar  in  Ohio,  New  York, 
and  Pennsylvania,  and  through  treason  and  rebellion  the 
ministry  and  people  of  the  Churches  in  those  States  turn 
traitors,  and  their  pulpits  become  vacant,  as  is  now  the  case 
all  through  the  South  within  the  lines  of  the  Federal  armies, 
then  "  the  order  may  be  extended  to  embrace"  them  also,  on 
the  ground  of  the  most  unquestionable  principles  of  public 
law,  as  recognized  among  all  nations.  It  is  on  this  ground 
that  the  course  of  the  Government  toward  disloyal  minis 
ters  and  people  at  the  South  is  justified. 

GOVERNMENT   AND    CHURCH    VINDICATED    BY    THE    LAW. 

The  laws  of  war  regard  all  citizens  of  a  hostile  nation 
as  public  enemies,  whether  actually  engaged  in  war  or 
not.*  When  a  nation  is  engaged  in  civil  war,  and,  as  in 
the  present  case,  is  attempting  to  put  down  a  rebellion 
undertaken  by  organized  State?,  all  persons  within  the 
territory  in  rebellion  are  in  like  manner  deemed  enemies 
of  the  Government.  This  is  settled  public  law  among  all 
nations  ;f  and  it  has  been  so  held  in  regard  to  the  present 
rebellion,  by  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States. 

But  the  case  immediately  in  hand  goes  far  beyond  this. 
It  concerns  ministers  and  churches  that  are  notoriously  in 

*  "  It  is  understood  that  the  whole  nation  declares  war  against  another  nation  ;  for 
the  sovereign  represents  the  nation,  and  acts  in  the  name  of  the  whole  society ;  and 
it  is  only  in  a  body,  and  in  her  national  character,  that  one  nation  has  to  do  with 
another.  Hence,  these  two  nations  are  enemies,  and  all  the  subjects  of  the  one  arc 
enemies  to  all  the  subjects  of  the  other.  In  this  particular,  custom  and  principles 
are  in  accord.  *  *  *  Since  women  and  children  are  subjects  of  the  State,  and 
members  of  the  nation,  they  are  to  be  ranked  in  the  class  of  enemies.  But  it  does 
not  thence  follow  that  we  are  justifiable  in  treating  them  like  men  who  bear  arms, 
or  are  capable  of  bearing  them.  It  will  appear  in  the  sequel,  that  we  have  not  the 
same  rights  against  all  classes  of  enemies." —  Vattel,  b.  3,  ch.  5. 

t  *  It  is  very  evident  that  the  common  laws  of  war  ought  to  be  observed  by  both 
parties  in  every  civil  war."—  Vattel,  b.  8,  ch.  18. 


GOVERNMENT    AND    CHURCH    VINDICATED.  243 

open  rebellion,  and  are  among  the  leaders  in  the  revolt. 
What  the  Government  -  has  done  is  to  recognize  these 
facts,  and  to  assume  control  of  the  property  which  these 
fugitive  rebels  left  behind  them,  and  which  had  been  used 
against  the  Government.  So  far  as  this  church  property 
is  concerned,  the  Government  might  have  confiscated 
every  dollar  of  it  to  its  own  use  by  the  regular  operation 
of  military  law ;  for,  notoriously,  these  abandoned  pulpits 
were  the  places  which  bred  and  fostered  treason,  and  with 
out  which  the  rebellion  would  never  have  had  more  than  an 
abortive  birth  ;  and  they  were  the  most  powerful  instigators 
of  the  war  against  the  Government,  up  to  the  very 
moment  its  armies  reclaimed  the  ground  on  which  they 
were  built.* 

When  Admiral  Farragut  captured  NQW  Orleans,  he  or 
General  Butler  might  have  taken  Dr.  Palmer's  Church  for 
a  hospital,  or  for  any  other  military  purpose,  and  the 
Government  might  retain  it  forever  as  such,  a  standing 
monument  to  the  infamy  of  his  treason ;  for  the  trustees, 
elders,  pew-holders,  and  all  claiming  an  interest  in  the 
property,  had  permitted  him  from  that  pulpit  to  assail  the 
Government  with  his  unwonted  eloquence,  and  to  urge  the 
people  to  open  rebellion  against  its  authority.  All  property, 
public  or  private,  used  in  open  aid  of  war,  is  liable  to 

*  "  When  once  we  have  precisely  determined  who  our  enemies  are,  it  is  easy  to 
know  what  are  the  things  belonging  to  the  enemy  (res  hostiles).  We  have  shown 
that  not  only  the  sovereign  with  whom  we  are  at  war  is  an  enemy,  but  also  his 
whole  nation,  even  the  very  women  and  children.  Every  thing,  therefore,  which 
belongs  to  that  nation, — to  the  state,  to  the  sovereign,  to  the  subjects  of  whatever 
age  or  sex, — every  thing  of  that  kind,  I  say,  falls  und^-  the  description  of  things  be 
longing  to  the  enemy.1' —  Vuttel,  b.  8,  ch.  5.  "  We  have  a  right  to  deprive  our  enemy 
of  his  possessions,  of  everything  which  may  augment  his  strength  and  enable  him 
to  make  war.  This  everyone  endeavors  to  accomplish  in  the  manner  most  suitable 
to  him.  Whenever  we  have  an  opportunity,  we  seize  on  the  enemy's  property,  and 
convert  it  to  our  own  use;  tind  thus,  besides  diminishing  the  enemy's  power,  we 
augment  our  own,  and  obtain,  at  least,  a  partial  indemnification  or  equivalent,  either 
for  what  constitutes  the  subject  of  the  war,  or  for  the  expenses  and  losses  incurred 
in  its  prosecution, — in  a  word,  we  do  ourselves  justice."—  Ibidem,  b.  3,  ch.  9. 


244  CLERICAL    DISLOYALTY    IN   LOYAL    STATES. 

condemnation  on  its  capture.  No  principle  of  public  law 
is  more  fully  laid  down  by  all  writers  on  the  Laws  of 
Nations  and  the  Laws  of  War  than  tins  ;  and  it  applies  to 
the  vast  majority  of  Church  edifices  throughout  the  South. 
By  their  being  used  as  among  the  most  powerful  means 
for  sustaining  and  prosecuting  the  war,  the  Government 
has  an  indefeasible  title  to  use  them  if  it  can  capture  them ; 
to  eject  disloyal  ministers  and  people  from  them,  and  to 
appropriate  them  to  any  proper  purpose  in  maintenance 
of  its  just  authority. 

But  what  has  the  Government  actually  done  ?  It  has 
preserved  these  Churches  for  religious  worship,  and  has 
simply  taken  a  course  which  would  secure  loyal  men  to 
occupy  their  pulpits.  This  is  the  whole  case,  and  the 
Government  stands  justified,  while  in  fact  it  might  have 
appropriated  them  to  other  uses. 

And  what  has  the  Church  done  ?  Its  course  is  fully 
vindicated  both  by  the  facts  and  the  law. 

And  yet  a  howl  of  indignation  has  come  over  from 
the  city  of  Toronto,  week  after  week,  and  has  taken  form 
in  traitorous  paragraphs  in  the  city  of  Louisville,  and  its 
senseless  bellowings  are  echoed  through  the  land  to 
frighten  pious  and  timid  women. 

VINDICATED    BY    REBEL    AUTHORITY. 

If  Dr.  Robinson  is  willing  to  receive  instruction  touch 
ing  the  relations  of  Church  and  State,  bearing  directly 
upon  the  point  in  hand,  we  refer  him  to  a  teacher 
whom  at  least  he  6*ught  to  respect.  It  comes  from  the 
pen  of  Dr.  Thornwell.  It  is  found  in  the  "  Address  of 
the  General  Assembly  of  the  Presbyterian  Church  in  the 
Confederate  States  of  America,"  which  was  republished 
in  Louisville  with  commendation,  and  with  which  Dr. 
Robinson  probably  had  something  to  do.  The  following 


GOVERNMENT    VINDICATED    BY    REBELS.  245 

sentences  from  that  Address  are  all  that  are  necessary  for 
our  present  purpose. 

When  the  State  makes  wicked  laws,  contradicting  the  eternal  princi 
ples  of  rectitude,  the  Church  is  at  liberty  to  testify  against  them,  and 
humbly  to  petition  that  they  may  be  repealed.  In  like  manner,  if  the 
Church  becomes  seditious,  and  a  disturber  of  the  peace,  THE  STATE  HAS  A 

RIGHT  TO  ABATE  THE  NUISANCE. 

That  is  good  doctrine,  and  we  commend  it  to  Dr.  Robin 
son's  acceptance.  It  comes  from  a  man  for  whom  he  has 
always,  with  ourselves,  had  a  high  admiration.  And 
besides,  it  is  the  doctrine  of  the  whole  "  Confederate  Gen 
eral  Assembly,"  for  this  Address  was  "  unanimously 
adopted  by  the  Assembly."  It  is  true,  indeed,  that  they 
write  their  own  condemnation,  for  no  nation  under  heaven 
ever  tolerated  a  class  of  men  within  it  who  were  more 
"  seditious,"  and  were  more  influential  "  disturbers  of  the 
peace,"  than  these  same  men  have  been  during  this  whole 
rebellion  ;  but  that  does  not  affect  the  matter ;  it  is  sound 
doctrine,  nevertheless. 

We  insist,  then,  that  the  case  shall  be  tried  upon  their 
own  principles.  The  Government  has  done  nothing  more 
than  carry  out  the  law  as  here  laid  down.  If  any  fact  is 
well  established,  it  is  that  the  mass  of  the  Southern 
Churches,  led  by  their  ministers,  have  gone  heart  and  soul 
into  the  rebellion  and  the  war  against  the  Government. 
These  Churches  have  been  recruiting  agents  for  the  rebel 
armies,  and  many  of  their  ministers  are  now  commissioned 
officers  in  them.  For  this  course  of  the  Southern  Church, 
the  Government,  upon  their  own  showing,  "  has  a  right  to 
abate  the  nuisance."  This  only  is  what  it  is  doing,  and 
the  manner  of  the  abatement  is  mild  and  gentle,  infinitely 
more  so  than  what  simple  justice  would  sanction,  but 
probably  dictated  by  sound  policy.  It  merely  forbids  these 
"  seditious"  men  and  "  disturbers  of  the  peace"  to  occupy 


2!6  CLERICAL    DISLOYALTY    IN    LOYAL    STATES. 

the  pulpits  they  have  profaned,  and  turns  them  over  to 
men  who  will  preach  the  Gospel  instead  of  treason,  and 
who  will  enjoin  obedience  to  lawful  authority  instead  of 
rebellion  against  it.  Its  course  stands  approved  by  the 
laws  of  God  and  man,  as  these  laws  are  understood  by  the 
rebels  themselves.  It  is  condemned  by  certain  men  in  the 
Border  States  and  elsewhere,  because  they  are  hostile  to 
the  Government  and  in  sympathy  with  its  enemies. 

We  have  now  shown,  in  a  few  examples,  that  there  is 
disloyalty  of  the  rankest  kind  among  the  ministers  of  the 
Gospel  in  some  parts  of  the  loyal  States.  These  cases  will 
serve  to  illustrate  others.  That  such  deeds  should  be  per 
mitted,  is  proof  of  the  leniency  of  the  Government ;  that 
they  should  pursue  such  a  course,  is  proof  of  their  deep 
guilt,  and  of  their  utter  insensibility  to  the  prime  obliga 
tions  of  citizenship.  We  shall  see,  in  a  subsequent  chapter, 
how  such  things  are  regarded,  and  what  punishment  is 
justly  due  them,  in  the  judgment  of  their  Southern  friends. 


THE    CHURCH    ON   DISLOYALTY.  247 


CHAPTER  VH. 

THE   CHURCH,   NORTH  AND  SOUTH,   ON  DISLOYALTY. 

THE  contest  in  which  the  nation  is  now  engaged  for  its 
life,  has  brought  into  discussion,  both  among  politicians 
and  churchmen,  many  important  principles  regarding  men's 
duties  and  rights  under  civil  government.  Among  them 
are  the  relations  of  the  Church  and  the  State,  in  the  differ 
ent  spheres  marked  out  for  them  by  that  divine  authority 
on  which,  as  organizations,  they  both  rest ;  and  the  respon 
sibilities  and  immunities  of  citizens  in  regard  to  their  civil 
and  religious  character. 

The  principles  involved  in  these  branches  of  the  general 
subject  are  always  theoretically  important.  At  the  present 
moment,  within  the  United  States,  they  are  more  practi 
cally  and  vitally  so  than  they  have  ever  been  before.  They 
affect  more  numerous  classes,  a  greater  multitude  of  indi 
viduals,  and  more  widely  extended  interests,  relating  to  the 
political,  social,  and  moral  welfare  of  the  whole  people,  in 
every  section  of  the  country,  than  has  been  the  case  at  any 
previous  period  in  our  history.  Personal  liberty,  of  speech, 
of  the  press,  and  of  action ;  reputation  and  character  for 
good  citizenship  and  for  piety  on  the  one  hand,  and  a  wreck 
of  these  on  the  other ;  property,  and  even  the  means  of 
earning  one's  bread  and  educating  one's  family;  the  good 
or  bad  name  which  a  man  will  consign  as  a  heritage  to  his 
children ;  the  punishment  from  the  authorities  of  his 
country,  if  he  prove  false  to  her  interests  in  a  time  of  civil 
peril,  or,  if  he  escape  that,  the  judgment  which  may  over 
take  him  from  God ;  these  are  only  the  obvious  bearings 
which  the  case  presents. 


248  THE    CHURCH    ON    DISLOYALTY. 

It  is  not  our  purpose  to  go  into  a  full  discussion  of  this 
broad  subject  in  this  place.  Each  branch  of  it  would 
require  more  space  than  we  can  devote  to  the  whole. 
There  are  a  few  points,  however,  which  it  is  essential  to 
consider,  to  meet  the  demands  of  the  general  object  which 
this  volume  is  designed  to  serve ;  and  these  we  propose  to 
view  chiefly  in  a  practical  rather  than  a  theoretical  light, 
and  to  note  the  principle  which  is  sanctioned  from  the 
action  which  is  taken  upon  it. 

ALL   MEN    SUBJECT   TO    CIVIL    AUTHORITY. 

The  authority  of  civil  government  extend  to  all  men, 
and  all  organizations  of  men.  It  rests  ultimately  upon  the 
fact  that  civil  society  is  ordained  of  God.  This  is  declared 
in  His  word.  The  first  civil  duty  of  every  citizen,  there 
fore,  is  to  render  obedience  to  the  lawful  government 
under  which  he  lives.  When  he  violates  this  duty,  he 
puts  himself  without  the  pale  of  its  protection,  and  renders 
himself  liable  to  punishment.  There  can  be  no  exception, 
in  either  of  these  aspects, — as  to  the  duty,  or  the  conse 
quences  of  failure  to  discharge  it, — in  the  case  of  any  per 
sons  or  classes  of  persons.  These  are  obvious  truths,  and 
are  commonly  admitted. 

OBEDIENCE    TO    CIVIL    AUTHORITY    A    RELIGIOUS    DUTY. 

If  civil  society  is  ordained  of  God,  and  if  civil  govern 
ment  derives  its  authority  from  Him,  then  obedience  to 
civil  rulers  is  not  only  a  civil  but  a  religious  obligation ; 
and  hence  it  follows,  that  any  infraction  of  this  duty,  either 
in  omission  or  commission,  is  not  only  an  offence  against 
the  laws  of  the  land,  but  is  a  sin  against  God.  Here,  like 
wise,  there  are  no  exemptions.  The  religious  as  well  <s 
the  civil  sanction  binds  all  men,  whether  they  beUevc  in 
God  or  deny  Him,  whether  they  have  religious  aH Actions 


MINISTERS    TO    PREACH    SUBJECTION.  249 

or  are  corrupt.  The  obligation  is  perfect,  and  if  disre 
garded  or  violated,  the  sin  is  complete;  arid  they  rest  upon 
God's  ordinance,  find  not  upon  men's  views  of  it  or  their 
feelings  in  regard  to  it.  An  atheist  is  bound  to  render 
obedience  to  civil  authority  as  really  as  any  one  else,  and 
if  he  falls  short  of  this  he  sins  as  really  as  any  other  person. 
His  unbelief  can  neither  destroy  his  obligation  nor  cancel 
his  guilt.  ' 

While  this  is  so,  the  weight  of  obligation  and  the 
heinousness  of  guilt  may  be  affected  by  men's  light  and 
advantages.  This  all  men  admit,  and  this  the  Scriptures 
teach.  Hence,  a  man  who  has  been  taught  from  childhood 
to  render  religious  obedience  to  civil  authority,  and  in 
whose  soul  dwells  the  power  of  divine  grace, — who  recog 
nizes  the  full  weight  of  Christian  obligation  in  all  things, 
and  gives  to  it  the  voluntary  homage  of  his  heart, — is 
deemed  a  far  more  guilty  man,  when  he  commits  treason 
against  his  country,  than  is  he  who  commits  the  same 
crime  and  yet  who  has  enjoyed  none  of  these  advantages, 
but  has  been  sunk  in  ignorance  and  corrupting  immoralities 
all  his  life.  This  doctrine  commends  itself  to  every  man's 
common  sense,  and  has  the  sanction  of  Scripture. 

MINISTERS    TO    PREACH    SUBJECTION. 

The  same  doctrine  holds  good  in  the  practical  applica 
tion  of  the  principle  to  ministers  of  the  Gospel.  They  with 
all  other  men  are  bound  to  render  religious  obedience  to 
the  civil  authority.  But  in  the  sight  of  God,  simple  obedi 
ence  on  their  part,  while  a  high  duty  in  itself,  is  at  the 
lowest  point  in  the  scale  in  this  class  of  their  duties.  They 
are  not  only  to  obey  the  powers  that  be,  but  they  are  in 
this  to  be  an  example  to  others ;  and,  above  all,  they  are  to 
preach  this  truth  to  the  people ;  to  give  instruction  in  all 
the  principles  of  God's  word  in  regard  to  obedience,  to 


250  THE    CHURCH    ON    DISLOYALTY. 

point  out  the  obligation,  and  to  hold  up  the  guilt  of  vio 
lating  it. 

Nor  are  they  to  deal  in  vague  generalities  and  abstrac 
tions  on  this  theme,  any  more  than  upon  any  other  doctrine 
of  the  Scriptures.  They  are  to  point  out  in  what  obedi 
ence  consists,  what  it  involves,  and  what  it  demands,  in 
heart,  word,  and  deed,  just  as  in  regard  to  any  other  reli 
gious  duty ;  and  they  are  to  declare  wherein  it  may  be 
violated  in  any  of  these  respects.  They  are  to  endeavor 
to  make  this  as  plain,  both  regarding  the  duty  and  the  sin 
of  violating  it,  as  any  doctrine  of  salvation,  for  all  are  alike 
from  God  ;  and,- indeed,  if  duty  and  sin  are  involved  herein, 
even  salvation  may  be  endangered  or  promoted  by  a  wrong 
or  right  direction  given  to  the  judgment,  heart,  conscience, 
or  conduct,  in  reference  to  this  as  truly  as  to  any  other 
subject  of  revelation.  In  a  word,  all  that  God  has  declared 
upon  these  themes,  the  minister  is  bound  to  unfold  to  the 
people. 

OMISSION    OF   THIS   DUTY   A   SIN. 

If  such  be  the  weight  of  obligation  resting  upon  a  minis 
ter,  under  such  a  view  of  his  office,  his  guilt  must  be  cor 
respondingly  great  if  he  barely  omit  this  branch  of  his 
public  duty.  The  failure  to  instruct  the  people  upon  these 
themes,  to  the  full  extent  that  they  are  revealed  in  the 
Scriptures,  becomes,  in  him,  a  heinous  sin  ;  for  he  is  placed 
in  the  pulpit  by  the  authority  of  God  for  this  very  purpose. 

It  may  be  further  true,  that  the  time  when  especially 
this  duty  should  be  fully  met, is  the  time  when  men  openly 
set  at  naught  these  obligations, — when  they  turn  against 
the  authority  of  lawful  civil  rulers,  and  combine  and  con 
spire  together  for  its  overthrow ;  and  more  especially  may 
this  be  true  when  so  great  a  scandal  rests  upon  the  Church 
itself,  when  the  people  of  God,  to  so  great  an  extent,  meet 


THE    CHOWNIXG    GUILT.  251 

in  His  sanctuary  to  hear  His  law  from  the  priest's  lips,  and 
then  turn  deliberately  against  that  lawful  Government 
which  God  in  His  providence  has  placed  over  them ;  and 
most  conclusively  must  this  be  the  time  for  God's  ministers 
to  cry  aloud  and  spare  not,  when  the  members  of  his 
Church  extensively  engage  in  the  work  and  guilt  of  treason 
and  rebellion  with  others  not  only,  but  when  they  take 
the  foremost  ranks  in  the  movement,  and  plead  religious 
obligations  as  a  justification.  Then,  above  all  times,  is  it 
a  minister's  duty  to  declare  the  law  of  God,  and  warn  his 
people  of  sin.  If  he  omit  it,  he  is  verily  guilty.  If  he  dis 
charge  it,  he  is  but  doing  his  official  work. 

THE     CROWNING     GUILT. 

What,  then,  must  be  thought  of  that  class  of  ministers 
whose  guilt  consists  not  merely  in  the  omission  of  this 
duty,  but  who  publicly  and  privately  counsel  open  resist 
ance  to  the  civil  authority? — who  prostitute  the  pulpit  to 
preaching  rebellion  against  their  civil  rulers,  and  who  be 
come  leaders  in  a  stupendous  revolution  against  a  popular 
Government,  and  the  open  advocates  of  war  upon  it  which 
is  slaying  millions  of  their  fellow-countrymen,  and  filling 
the  land  with  widowhood  and  orphanage? 

And  what  shall  be*thought  of  the  religious  press  which 
openly  teaches  such  doctrines,  and  becomes  the  most 
powerful  ally,  with  the  pulpit,  in  leading  the  people  of 
God  into  tht-se  crimes?  Under  the  garb  of  religious  doc 
trine,  it  teaches  that  which  is  at  war  with  its  first  prin 
ciples  ;  under  a  pretence  of  piety,  it  openly  encourages 
sin ;  with  the  plea  of  serving  God,  it  is  the  most  powerful 
agent  of  the  devil ;  pretending  to  a  regard  for  human  life, 
a  desire  for  peace,  and  a  horror  of  blood  and  carnage,  it  is 
directly  aiding  those  who  have  raised  the  standard  of  a 
bloody  rebellion  against  a  Government  which,  by  the  con- 
12 


252  THE  CHURCH  ox  DISLOYALTY. 

fession  of  their  ablest  statesmen,  never  injured  them,  and 
whose  power  and  patronage  had  always  been  in  their 
hands. 

If  guilt  surpassing  this  has  ever  been  committed,  since 
time  began,  among  so  enlightened  a  people,  and  under 
pretence  of  religion,  the  case  has  entirely  escaped  our 
notice. 

DISLOYALTY   PUNISHABLE    BY   THE    STATE. 

It  becomes  an  interesting  question,  What  does  disloyalty 
deserve,  and  who  may  mete  out  its  punishment?  Upon 
this  men  have  disagreed,  and  do  still. 

That  the  civil  authority  may  punish  it,  no  one  doubts. 
Treason,  its  highest  type,  is  a  crime  committed  directly 
against  the  State.  It  seeks  the  overthrow  of  its  authority, 
or  the  destruction  or  usurpation  of  the  Government.  In 
all  countries  it  is  regarded  as  the  highest  of  crimes,  for  it 
perils  the  Government  and  all  it  guards,  and  hence  it  is 
generally  punishable  with  death,  though  some  degrees  of 
it  with  banishment  or  with  the  heaviest  civil  disabilities. 
The  Constitution  of  the  United  States  defines  treason,  and 
the  laws  enacted  under  it  declare  the  penalty  of  death. 

There  is  also  misprision  of  treason,  and  there  are  other 
crimes  which  come  under  the  general  designation  of  dis 
loyalty.  As  these,  in  all  their  grades  and  degrees,  are 
crimes  against  the  State,  they  may  be  punished  by  its 
authority. 

We  of  course  use  the  term  "  loyalty"  not  in  any  legal, 
but  wholly  in  a  popular  sense.  We  are  not  aware  that 
the  word  is  found  in  any  of  our  statute  laws  as  a  legal 
term.  But  this  is  of  no  consequence  ;  all  understand  what 
is  meant  by  it,  as  applied  in  the  contest  now  raging  in  our 
country.  Nor  is  it  of  the  least  moment  where,  how,  or 
when,  the  term  originated.  It  is  amusing  to  tee  how 


WHAT   LOYALTY    AND    DISLOYALTY    ARE.  253 

many  words  have  been  wasted  in  an  attempt  to  show  that 
loyalty  and  disloyalty  can  have  no  application  to  the  people 
in  our  civil  war.  It  is  of  no  manner  of  importance  that 
"  loyalty"  was  formerly  used  to  express  attachment  to  the 
sovereign  and  the  reigning  family  in  monarchical  coun 
tries.  It  has  become  popularized  in  the  United  States, 
and  at  the  present  moment  expresses  attachment  to  the 
Government  now  imperilled  and  a  dedre  for  its  mainte 
nance  against  the  rebellion  seeking  its  subversion. 

WHAT     LOYALTY     AND     DISLOYALTY     ARE. 

Loyalty  means  faithfulness  to  the  obligations  of  law  ; 
obedience  to  lawful  authority.  Men  will  differ  as  to 
whether  a  certain  act  or  line  of  conduct  is  loyal  or  dis 
loyal,  according  as  they  define  these  terms.  The  guilt  or 
innocence  of  a  person  on  trial  for  any  crime,  must  be 
determined  by  the  facts  and  circumstances  of  the  particu 
lar  case,  and  which  may  not  belong  to  any  other  case;  nor 
would  full  light  be  thrown  upon  the  proper  result  by  the 
most  accurate  verbal  definition  of  the  crime  under  which 
he  were  arraigned. 

It  is  of  little  practical  avail,  therefore,  that  men  differ 
upon  the  meaning  of  the  term  "  loyalty."  It  is  of  far  more 
importance  that  they  agree  upon  the  duty  of  manifesting 
it  in  support  of  the  Government,  even  though  they  differ 
as  to  the  manner  and  degree  in  which  such  manifestation 
should  be  evinced.  For  ourselves,  we  deem  it  a  citizen's 
duty  to  sustain  the  Government  in  putting  down  the  rebel 
lion  by  all  the  power  he  can  command ;  by  his  personal 
influence,  by  word  and  deed,  by  his  purse,  his  sword,  and 
his  prayers.  By  putting  it  down,  we  mean,  destroying  it 
root  and  branch,  crushing  the  life  out  of  it,  and  putting  it 
forever  past  the  faintest  hope  of  resurrection  ;  and  we  are 
free  to  say,  that  we  value  that  citizen's  loyalty  at  a  very 


254  THE  CHUKCH  ox  DISLOYALTY. 

low  figure  which  docs  not  come  up  to  that  point.  It  is 
worth  nothing,  and  may  be  worth  infinitely  less  than 
nothing  in  such  perils  as  are  now  upon  the  nation, — yea, 
may  be  counted  upon  the  other  side, — unless  it  be  openly 
demonstrative,  in  all  proper  ways,  times,  and  places,  in 
sustaining  the  Government  against  its  deadly  foe. 

DISLOYALTY     PUNISHABLE     BY    THE     CHURCH. 

We  have  seen  that  disloyalty  is  punishable  by  the  State. 
It  is  equally  clear  that  it  is  punishable  by  the  Church. 
Men  have  differed  upon  this  point,  and  do  still,  as  they  do 
upon  other  matters  that  are  plain.  We  cannot  expect 
them  to  agree  in  those  things  in  which  their  prejudices 
are  deeply  enlisted,  until  they  are  willing  to  lay  them 
aside.  It  is  perfectly  demonstrable,  however,  that  dis 
loyalty  is  an  offence  of  which  the  Church  may  take  cogni 
zance. 

In  saying  this  we  wish  not  to  be  misunderstood.  We 
have  indicated  what,  personally,  we  deem  to  be  genuine 
loyalty  for  every  citizen  of  the  United  States  in  this  time 
of  civil  peril.  We  do  not,  however,  announce  that  as  a 
standard  for  the  Church,  on  which  she  should  act  in  eccle 
siastical  discipline ;  nor  do  we  lay  it  down  as  a  standard 
for  other  men.  To  his  own  Master  each  one  standeth  or 
falleth.  We  give  it,  simply,  as  our  own  view  of  what 
duty  demands.  It  is  our  opinion  ;  nothing  more.  We 
allow  other  men  to  have  theirs. 

But  that  disloyalty  is  an  ecclesiastical  offence  which  the 
Church  may  consider  and  judger  is  something  higher  than 
mere  opinion.  It  follows  inevitably  from  the  teachings 
of  the  word  of  God.  What  loyalty  and  disloyalty  are,  in 
any  case  that  may  come  before  the  Church  for  adjudica 
tion,  those  who  have  to  deal  with  it  must  determine ;  for, 
as  before  observed,  each  case  must  be  settled  by  the  facts 


REASONS  FOUNDED  OX  REVELATION.        255 

and  circumstances  which  are  peculiar  to  it.  But  that  the 
principle  of  disloyalty  is  such  that  it  may  involve  an 
ecclesiastical  offence  by  the  word  of  God,  is  beyond 
doubt ;  and  it  is  only  to  the  principle  that  we  now  give 
any  consideration. 

REASONS    FOUNDED    ON    REVELATION. 

The  doctrine  we  maintain  arises  inevitably  from  the 
nature  and  duty  of  obedience  to  the  civil  authority.  The 
nature  of  the  obedience  enjoined  is  religious.  It  has  God's 
highest  sanctions.  To  violate  the  injunction  is  sin.  Sin 
is  to  be  removed  by  inculcating  truth ;  and  when  it  breaks 
out  in  open  acts  of  scandal,  it  may  be  met  by  ecclesiasti 
cal  supervision,  trial,  and  censure.  This  is  the  case  with 
every  grade  and  kind  of  offence  which  affects  private  or 
public  morals,  or  the  welfare  of  society,  or  the  influence 
and  good  name  of  religion  among  men. 

Disloyalty  is  no  exception  to  this.  Open  disobedience 
to  rulers,  when  it  manifests  itself  in  disturbing  or  threaten 
ing  the  peace  of  society,  or  aims  or  connives  at  resistance 
to  lawful  authority,  or  subverting  the  Government,  is  a 
sin  and  a  scandal  by  the  word  of  God ;  and  if  committed 
by  a  member  of  the  Church,  he  may  be  arraigned  and 
punished  for  it  as  clearly  as  for  any  other  scandal.  If  not, 
why  not  ?  Is  it  because  this  is  a  civil  offence,  and  punisha 
ble  by  the  State  ?  So  is  arson,  so  is  murder,  so  is  fraud  ; 
and  yet,  will  a  man  pretend  that  one  may  burn  down  his 
neighbor's  house,  or  take  his  life  in  cold  blood,  or  cheat 
him  out  of  his  property,  and  not  be  disturbed  by  the 
Church,  because  the  State  may  take  cognizance  of  these 
offences  ?  This  is  in  the  highest  degree  preposterous. 
Nor  is  it  enough  that  the  State  does  actually  punish  for 
these  crimes ;  the  Church  may  also  inflict  censure  for 
them,  in  the  same  case,  in  the  person  of  the  same  indi- 


256  THE    CHURCH    ON    DISLOYALTY. 

vidual  on  whom  the  State  has  inflicted  its  highest  sentence. 
It  would  be  a  singular  spectacle  to  behold  a  man  incar 
cerated  justly  as  a  civil  penalty  for  forgery,  and  yet  the 
Church  take  no  action,  and  lie,  in  consequence,  remain  in 
good  standing,  on  the  ground  that  he  was  already  suffer 
ing  punishment  from  the  State.  Nor,  on  the  other  hnnd, 
is  the  Church  to  be  governed  or  limited  by  the  State  in 
such  cases.  The  State  is  not  infallible.  A  man  may  be 
punished  unjustly.  If  the  victim  of  tyranny,  or  prejudice, 
or  ignorance,  or  incompetency,  be  a  member  of  the 
Church,  the  whole  case  may  be  ecclesiastically  considered 
and  decided,  notwithstanding  the  State  may  have  acted 
upon  it.  The  Church  is  not  bound  in  such  case  by  what 
the  State  has  done,  so  far  as  to  be  debarred  an  adjudica 
tion  ;  and  if,  in  her  judgment,  her  member  is  oppressed, 
she  may  so  declare.  She  may  consider  the  testimony, 
conduct  the  case  by  her  own  rules  of  proceeding,  and 
come  to  a  decision  independent  of  the  State  and  contrary 
to  its  judgment.  She  cannot  release  from  prison,  nor 
restore  to  life,  but  she  may  place  the  man  in  good  stand 
ing  within  her  pale,  and  show  the  most  clear  reasons,  it 
may  be,  for  her  decision ;  and  in  nothing  of  this  does  she 
show  the  least  insubordination  or  disrespect  towards  the 
civil  authority,  but  may  be  entirely  submissive  to  it.  All 
this  arises  from  the  fact  that  the  respective  jurisdictions 
of  the  Church  and  the  State,  though  embracing  the  same 
persons  and  covering  the  same  offences,  have  different 
spheres  to  fill,  and  different  ends  to  serve,  in  their  cogniz 
ance  of  the  same  conduct. 

SPIRITUAL    JURISDICTION    BROADER    THAN    CIVIL. 

But  the  difference  between  these  separate  ruling  powers 
does  not  stop  here.  The  spiritual  jurisdiction  is  both 
deeper  and  broader  than  the  civil.  It  embraces  offences 


SPIRITUAL    JURISDICTION    BROADER    THAN    CIVIL.     257 

which  the  latter  does  not  touch ;  and  in  those  which  the 
civil  power  does  consider,  there  are  moral  elements  which 
the  spiritual  power  alone  deems  important.  There  are  a 
multitude  of  offences,  any  one  of  which,  habitually  com 
mitted,  would  destroy  a  man's  standing  in  the  Church, 
and  upon  trial  would  cast  him  out  of  it;  and  yet,  though 
guilty  of  al!  of  them,  his  good  standing  before  the  laws 
of  the  land  would  not  be  affected.  And  there  are  grades 
of  the  same  radical  offence  which  the  Church  holds  to  be 
stamped  with  guilt,  but  which  the  State  overlooks.  A 
man  may  be  guilty  of  "perjury,"  and  the  State  will  punish 
him ;  but  all  false  swearing,  or  false  statements  under 
oath,  are  not  "  legal  perjury."  But  by  the  laws  which 
regulate  ecclesiastical  discipline,  lying,  deception,  false 
hood, — all  which  enter  into  the  moral  elements  of  perjury, 
— are  themselves  offences  which  the  Church  may  consider, 
whether  committed  under  oath  or  not.  A  variety  of  hear 
ings  and  pleadings  in  almost  any  case  before  a  Church  court, 
which  a  civil  court  would  not  consider,  or  would  rmle  out 
entirely,  may  be  deemed  important,  and  may  be  decisive  of 
the  result  which  is  reached.  The  principle  here  involved 
is  of  the  highest  moment.  The  jurisdiction  of  the  Church, 
as  embracing  a  man's  conduct,  or  as  cognizant  of  any  act 
of  his  life,  reaches  where  the  State  cannot  go,  because  its 
rule  is  spiritual,  and  deals  primarily  with  the  heart  and 
conscience  ;  and  although  in  actual  discipline  the  Church 
deals  only  with  acts,  there  are  classes  of  actions  and  ele 
ments  of  conduct  which  are  deemed  proper  for  its  con 
sideration  which  do  not  come  within  the  civil  statute. 

This  may  be  illustrated  in  regard  to  the  offence  of  dis 
loyalty.  Who  will  pretend  to  say,  that,  because  a  man 
may  not  have  committed  "  treason"  in  the  technical  sense 
of  the  statute,  he  may  not  have  been  actually  guilty  of  it 
before  the  law  of  God  ?  or  that,  because  there  may  not  be 


258  THE    CHURCH    ON    DISLOYALTY. 

ground  for  prosecution  before  a  civil  court  for  that  offence, 
it  therefore  follows  necessarily  that  there  cannot  be  ground 
for  charges  before  a  spiritual  court  ?  To  decide  that  there 
cannot  bo,  is  to  decide  that  the  Church  must  simply  fol 
low  in  the  wake  of  the  State ;  to  take  the  position  that 
only  offences  of  the  same  nature  belong  to  both  ;  to  con 
found  the  jurisdictions,  which  are  distinct,  into  one;  to 
join  together  what  God  has  forever  separated.  Any  per 
son  may  be  safely  challenged  to  point  out  where  such  a 
position  is  sustained  by  the  word  of  God.  It  is,  there 
fore,  a  totally  erroneous  doctrine  to  maintain  that  the 
Church  cannot  go  beyond  the  State  in  inquiring  into  this 
or  any  other  alleged  offence  ;  or  that  either  is  precluded, 
within  its  own  proper  sphere,  from  canvassing  an  offence 
against  its  own  law,  by  reason  of  what  the  other  may  have 
done  or  not  done. 

DISLOYALTY    ACTUALLY    CONDEMNED    BY    THE    CHURCH. 

Passing  from  these  abstract  principles,  we  find  that  the 
Church  has  sustained  them  in  its  actual  practice.  Nothing 
is  better  settled  in  its  whole  history.  Disobedience  to  the 
civil  authority,  disloyalty,  treason,  and  misprision  of  trea 
son,  have  always  been  treated  as  ecclesiastical  offences. 
This  is  shown  in  the  records  of  every  Church.  Members 
have  been  excommunicated,  and  ministers  have  been  de 
posed,  for  such  offences  by  the  Church ;  and  they  have  also, 
for  the  same  crimes,  been  punished  by  the  State.  The<e 
things  have  occurred,  as  is  well  known,  in  every  country  in 
Christendom. 

Sometimes  they  have  occurred  in  times  of  quiet,  but  most 
commonly  in  times  of  civil  war.  We  say  nothing  upon 
the  merits  of  any  particular  case.  Great  injustice  may 
sometimes  have  been  done  in  ecclesiastical  convictions  for 
disloyalty  ;  while,  on  the  other  hand,  no  doubt,  some  men 


PRESBYTERIAN    CIIURCII. DR.    M^PHEETERS.  259 

may  have  gone  "  unwhipt  of  justice"  by  the  Church,  as 
some  will  go  hereafter.  All  we  are  seeking  is  the  sanction 
of  the  principle,  and  we  find  that  abundantly  sustained  in 
the  history  of  the  Church. 

Several  of  the  leading  denominations  at  the  North, 
during  our  present  civil  war,  have  acted  on  the  right  and 
duty  of  the  Church  to  discipline  their  members,  and  espe 
cially  their  ministers,  for  disloyalty.  In  some  instances 
they  have  censured,  suspended,  or  silenced  them.  We 
know  nothing  of  the  merits  of  these  special  cases,  but  they 
illustrate  the  principle,  that  disloyalty  is  deemed  to  be  an 
offence  within  the  proper  cognizance  of  the  Church.  The 
secular  prints,  in  some  cases,  and  at  least  one  "  religious" 
journal,  have  made  a  great  outcry  that  such  proceedings 
were  a  violation  of  the  Church's  spiritual  principles,  and  an 
interference  with  the  rights  of  the  citizen.  But  all  such 
outbursts  are  senseless,  stupid,  silly,  and  have  no  other 
importance  than  that  they  give  "aid  and  comfort"  to 
rebels  in  arms  against  the  Government.  The  Church  has 
as  clear  a  jurisdiction  over  its  ministers  and  members, 
touching  loyalty  and  disloyalty,  as  over  their  conduct 
touching  drunkenness  or  profanity. 

PRESBYTERIAN    CHURCH. DR.    M°PHEETERS. 

One  of  the  most  noted  cases,  of  recent  occurrence,  by 
which  the  doctrine  for  which  we  contend  has  been  illus 
trated  by  an  actual  adjudication,  is  that  of  the  Rev.  Samuel 
B.  McPheeters,  D.  D.,  Pastor  of  the  Pine  Street  Presbyte 
rian  Church  in  St.  Louis,  Missouri.  It  was  decided  in  the 
General  Assembly  of  the  Presbyterian  Church,  at  Newark, 
New  Jersey,  in  May  last.  The  trial  lasted  several  days, 
and  the  decision  was  given  after  a  full  discussion,  in  which 
Dr.  McPheeters  and  a  large  number  of  members  of  the 
Assembly  participated. 
12* 


260  THE    CIIUKCH    OX    DISLOYALTY. 

It  is  not  necessary  for  our  present  purpose  to*  go  largely 
into  this  case,  or  to  discuss  its  merits,  or  to  pass  judgment 
upon  the  decision.  None  of  these  are  essential  to  the  im 
mediate  matter  in  hand,  or  to  an  understanding  of  the  prin 
ciples  we  are  considering.  We  have  only  to  say  of  the 
decision,  that  as  it  was  made  by  the  court  of  last  resort,  by 
conscientious  and  intelligent  men,  and  by  a  majority  of  one 
hundred  and  seventeen  to  forty-seven,  after  a  full  hearing, 
we  there  let  it  stand. 

It  is  proper  to  say,  however,  that  Dr.  McPheeters  was 
not  on  trial  before  the  Assembly  on  a  formal  charge  of 
disloyalty.  Indeed,  there  were  no  charges,  strictly  so 
called,  and  no  testimony  in  the  usual  sense,  either  before 
the  Assembly  or  the  court  below,  on  which  the  case  pro 
ceeded.  It  was  a  dissolution  of  the  pastoral  relation  exist 
ing  between  Dr.  McPheeters  and  his  congregation,  made 
by  the  Presbytery  of  St.  Louis,  and  their  forbidding  him 
to  preach,  out  of  which  the  case  grew,  and  of  which  Dr. 
McPheeters  complained  to  the  Assembly.  Irregularities 
in  the  proceedings,  a  want  of  authority  in  the  Presbytery 
to  act  in  the  premises,  gross  injustice  done  to  his  pastoral 
and  ministerial  rights,  and  acting  without  the  wishes  of  a 
majority  of  the  congregation,  were  among  the  things 
charged  in  the  complaint  against  the  Presbytery.  The 
merits  of  the  case  thus  involved  many  radical  principles  of 
purely  ecclesiastical  law,  and  in  dismissing  the  complaint 
and  sustaining  the  Presbytery,  the  Assembly  overruled  the 
grounds  on  which  the  complaint  was  based. 

It  is  nevertheless  perfectly  clear,  that  Dr.  McPheeters 
regarded  himself,  and  was  regarded  by  his  friends,  as  vir 
tually  on  trial  for  "disloyalty."  This  is  the  aspect  given  to 
the  case  by  the  proceedings  of  the  Assembly,  by  the  argu 
ments  on  both  sides,  though  not  of  course  by  the  judgment. 
Disloyalty  was  the  ground  of  dissatisfaction  in  a  large  mi- 


INDIVIDUAL    OPINIONS    IN    THE    ASSEMIJLY.  201 

nority  of  his  congregation,  and  this  alone  led  to  the  action 
of  the  Presbytery.  This  is  a  simple  matter  of  fact,  and  of 
record.  The  Assembly's  decision,  by  the  large  vote  given, 
was  thus  deemed  a  virtual  condemnation  for  disloyalty, 
was  foreshadowed  in  many  of  the  speeches  as  involving 
that  consequence,  and  has  since  been  so  accepted  by  the 
friends  of  Dr.  McPheeters  in  their  animadversions  upon 
the  proceedings  of  the  Assembly. 

It  then  appears  that  the  General  Assembly  of  the  Pres 
byterian  Church,  has  virtually  sustained  the  doctrine  that 
"disloyalty"  may  be  treated  as  an  ecclesiastical  offence 
by  its  action  in  the  case  of  one  of  its  ministers. 

INDIVIDUAL    OPINIONS    IN    THE    ASSEMBLY. 

It  must  not  be  supposed  that  the  vote  given  in  the  case 
of  Dr.  McPheeters,  is  the  criterion  for  determining  how 
large  a  portion  of  the  General  Assembly  consider  "  dis 
loyalty"  as  a  proper  offence  for  ecclesiastical  action.  On 
the  contrary,  we  have  not  observed  (though,  possibly, 
some  case  may  have  escaped  our  notice)  that  a  single 
member  took  open  and  distinct  ground  that  disloyalty  was 
not  a  proper  subject  for  Church  censure.  Certain  it  is, 
however,  that  the  most  distinguished  ministers  and  other 
members  of  the  minority,  as  well  as  Dr.  McPheeters 
himself,  directly  admitted,  in  their  arguments,  that  disloy 
alty  is  an  ecclesiastical  offence.  We  refer  to  a  few  of 
them. 

Dr.  McPheeters  said  in  his  defence : 

He  was  prepared  to  admit  that  a  man  might  render  &  formal  obedience 
to  all  lawful  requirements,  and  so  demean  himself  as  to  avoid  liability 
to  punishment,  and  yet.  in  times  like  these,  lead  such  a  course  as  to 
render  him  a  dangerous  member  of  the  community,  and  an  intolerable 
citizen  of  an  agitated  State.  *  *  *  The  Assembly  must  decide  what 
liberty  the  Church  will  allow  her  pastors,  whose  conscientious  convic 
tions  lead  them  to  stand  aloof,  in  the  pulpit,  from  the  civil  strife  now 


232  THE    CHURCH    OX    DISLOYALTY. 

desolating  the  land.  This,  after  all,  u-iderlies  the  whole  case.  *  *  * 
The  Assembly  must  decide,  if  they  do  not  sustain  this  complaint,  that 
I  cannot  preach  to  Pine  street,  because,  as  a  minister,  I  stand  aloof 
from  civil  strife.  But  if  not  in  Pine  street,  then  nowhere  ;  for  the  same 
principle  applies  everywhere.  *  *  *  If  he  was  disloyal  in  any  sense 
that  should  mar  his  case  before  this  court,  he  was  also  guilty  of  perjury, 
for  he  had  taken  an  oath  of  allegiance,  and  kept  it  too ;  and  when  he 
was  tried,  he  wished  it  done  on  charges  regularly  tabled.  He  wished 
evidence ;  not  in  loose  statements,  innuendoes,  and  patriotic  speeches, 
but  evidence  under  oath.  *  *  *  Now,  what  he  had  asked  as  a 
defiance  to  his  accusers,  he  demanded  as  a  right  of  this  Assembly,  that 
if  any  statements  were  made  or  insinuations  thrown  out  that  he  had 
been  guilty  of  such  offences,  that  you  will  order  the  Presbytery  of  St. 
Louis  to  take  up  and  issue  the  case. 

Dr.  McPheeters  thus  makes  the  most  explicit  acknowl 
edgment  of  the  right  of  a  Church  court  to  try  a  person  on 
charges  of  disloyalty.  Dr.  William  L.  Breckinridge  said 
upon  this  case : 

It  has  been  attempted  to  thrust  him  out  of  his  work  among  the  flock, 
over  which  the  Holy  G-host  hath  made  him  overseer,  and  to  brand  into 
him  a  mark  of  dishonor — with  the  allegation  of  that,  which  on  all  sides 
is  called  a  crime.  *  *  *  He  is  called  a  disloyal  man — not  true  to  the 
country-  -and  on  this  clamor  it  is  attempted  to  drive  him  from  his  work 
in  the  Church. 

Dr.  N".  L.  Rice  took  ground  that  disloyalty  was  an 
offence  which  may  be  dealt  with  by  the  Church,  and  spoke 
as  follows  : 

We  have  virtually  a  minister  on  trial — virtually  o*  trial ;  visited  too 
with  the  severest  penalties  that  could  result  from  a  trial.  *  *  *  We 
have  been  told  that  a  majority  of  the  ministers  of  the  Synod  of  Missouri 
are  disloyal,  and,  of  course,  immoral.  *  *  *  The  real  charge  brought 
against  Dr.  McPheeters  was  disloyalty ;  on  this  the  opposition  of  the 
minority  of  his  Church  was  based  ;  on-  this  the  allegation  of  loss  of  use 
fulness  wras  founded ;  on  this  charge  the  Presbytery  proceeded.  This 
is  manifest  in  all  the  pleadings  there,  and  in  all  the  pleadings  here. 
This  was  a  charge  affecting  his  moral  character ;  for  disloyalty  is  a  sin. 
Had  the  Presbytery  a  right  to  punish  him  for  this  sin,  and  to  fix  this 
blot  upon  his  character,  without  arraigning  him,  and  tabling  charges, 


INDIVIDUAL    OPINIONS    IN   THE    ASSEMBLY.  263 

and  giving  him  an  opportunity  of  defence?  *  *  *  They  enter 
tained  this  charge  affecting  his  moral  character.  *  *  *  If  Presby 
tery  believed  that  he  was  disloyal,  they  should  have  tried  him,  and  given 
him  the  usual  opportunity  of  defence.  They  did  not  go  far  enough,  if 
the  charge  is  well  founded ;  if  he  was  loyal,  they  have  gone  too  far. 
*  *  *  He  (Dr.  Rice)  did  not  know  whether  that  brother  is  loyal  or 
not.  *  *  *  Prove  his  disloyalty,  and  he  would  go  farther  than  the 
Presbytery  went. 

Mr.  Cleland  said : 

If  Dr.  McPheeters  is  guilty  of  treason — this  is  the  highest  crime 
against  the  laws  of  God  and  of  man,  against  the  Church  and  the  Com 
monwealth — then  he  ought  to  be  suspended  from  (he  Church  by  the  Presby 
tery,  and  from  the  gallows  by  the  sheriff  of  his  county! 

All  those  whose  remarks  we  have  given  above  voted  in 
the  minority.  Certain  friends  of  Dr.  McPheeters,  belong 
ing  to  the  Presbytery  that  acted  on  his  case,  sent  a 
"memorial"  in  his  behalf  to  the  General  Assembly,  in 
which  they  state  as  follows  : 

He  openly  announces  his  recognized  obligations  to  "be  subject  to  the 
powers  that  be,"  and  his  enemies  have  been  challenged  in  vain  to  point 
to  one  word  or  one  act  inconsistent  with  those  obligations.  Ifsuchword 
or  act  can  be  fairly  pointed  out,  your  memorialists  hereby  agree  to  with 
draw  all  interest  and  effort  in  his  behalf,  and  to  consign  him  to  his 
just  deserts  at  the  hands  of  a  Presbytery  which  has  shown  every  dispo 
sition  to  deal  with  him  in  the  utmost  severity. 

The  foregoing  extract,  (together  with  a  much  larger 
portion  of  this  memorial),  we  take  as  we  find  it  embodied 
in  the  speech  of  Dr.  W.  L.  Breckinridge. 

It  thus  appears,  that  not  only  the  Assembly  in  its  virtual 
act,  but  the  minority  of  the  body,  in  their  speeches  on  the 
case,  with  Dr.  McPheeters  and  the  St.  Louis  ''memorial 
ists,1'  put  themselves  on  the  record  in  favor  of  the  doctrine 
that  a  minister  may  be  prosecuted  in  a  Church  court  on  a 
charge  of  "  disloyalty,"  and  that  therefore  this  is  an  eccle 
siastical  offence.  We  trust  they  will  be  found  standing 
there  in  any  time  of  future  need. 


264  THE    CHURCH    ON    DISLOYALTY. 


DR.    MCPHEETERS    OX    MILITARY    ORDERS. 

We  had  occasion  to  notice  in  the  last  chapter  the  malig 
nant  denunciations  of  The  True  Presbyterian  against  the 
Government,  for  not  allowing  the  ministerial  traitors  nt 
the  South  to  occupy  the  pulpits  from  which  they  had 
preached  treason.  We  showed  that  the  orders  of  the 
War  Department  were  justified,  both  by  the  law  and  the 
facts,  in  turning  the  Southern  Churches  over  to  loyal  min 
isters  ;  and  that,  even  according  to  rebel  authority,  from 
the  "  Confederate  General  Assembly,"  it  was  admitted 
that  "  the  State  has  a  right  to  abate  the  nuisance,"  when 
ever  "the  Church  becomes  seditious,  and  a  disturber  of 
the  peace,"  as  was  notoriously  the  case  with  the  mass  of 
the  whole  Southern  Church  of  all  denominations. 

It  is  but  just  to  allow  Dr.  McPheeters  to  be  heard  on 
this  point,  as  his  Church  was  taken  from  him  by  military 
authority.  In  his  late  speech  in  the  General  Assembly, 
he  said : 

It  was  seized  *  *  *  to  the  exclusion  of  the  session,  trustees, 
and  its  own  congregation.  He  had  no  wish  to  arraign  or  find  fault  with 
the  officers  of  the  Government.  He  wished  to  treat  them  fairly.  He 
acknowledged  that,  in  a  State  convulsed  by  armed  resistance  to  the 
Government,  they  would  be  justified  in  doing  whatever  they  deemed  neces 
sary  for  the  public  safety,  Nor  would  he  have  thought  them  wrong  in 
seizing  his  Church,  banishing  him  from  the  pulpit,  or  dragging  him  from 
the  very  altar,  if  he  or  his  people  had  used  these  for  fomenting  treason,  or 
in  any  way  opposing  the  Government. 

We  commend  these  just  sentiments,  applied  here  by 
Dr.  McPheeters  to  himself  and  Church  hypothetically, — 
but  true  to  the  letter  of  the  Churches  in  the  South  taken 
possession  of  by  the  War  Department, — to  the  serious 
consideration  of  The  True  Presbyterian;  but  we  doubt 
whether  its  conductors  are  in  a  state  of  heart  to  learn  any 


FALSE    CRITERION  OF    LOYALTY.  2G5 

thing  even  from  one  for   whom  they  manifest  so  deep  a 
sympathy. 

Dr.  McPheeters  might,  furthermore,  become  their  in 
structor  upon  the  nature  of  the  order  of  General  Rose- 
crans,  which  they  have  so  assiduously  perverted,  if,  indeed, 
they  were  not  callous  to  instruction  from  any  good  quarter. 
Dr.  Robinson  speaks  of  it,  as  "  Rosecrans's  impious  and  in 
famous  order  of  Caesar's  oath  as  a  qualification  for  sitting 
in  Christ's  court."  But  Dr.  McPheeters,  in  his  speech, 
while  mentioning  his  "  scruples  of  conscience  which  made 
that  order  a  restraint,"  speaks  of  it  as  follows: 

In  making  this  statement,  Dr.  McPheeters  said  that  the  end  aimed  at 
by  the  General  wa-s  a  justifiable  one,  one  which  it  was  necessary  they 
should  try  to  accomplish,  viz. :  to  prevent  bodies  of  men  from  meeting 
and  acting  in  a  way  injurious  to  the  State,  if  thtre  is  good  reason  to  sus 
pect  that  they  will  so  act. 

One  more  point  of  comparison  will  suffice.  Speaking  of 
the  proceedings  of  the  Assembly  in  the  case  of  Dr.  Mc 
Pheeters,  Dr.  Robinson  says:  "  Others,  in  the  very  slang 
of  Strong  &  Co.,  declared  the  issue  to  be,  Dr.  McPheeters's 
loyalty  or  disloyalty."  But  Dr.  McPheeters  himself,  in 
reference  to  this  very  issue,  said :  "  This,  after  all,  under- 
lies  this  whole  case"  And  so  the  mass  of  the  General 
Assembly  regarded  it,  the  minority  as  well  as  the  major 
ity  ;  and  so  did  the  friends  of  Dr.  McPheeters,  the  St. 
Louis  "  memorialists." 

FALSE    CRITERION    OF    LOYALTY. 

While  the  whole  Church  seem  to  agree  that  disloyalty 
is  an  ecclesiastical  offence, — always  excepting  the  Canadian 
exile  and  his  paper, — it  is  well  to  note  what  is  often  re 
sorted  to  as  a  standard  of  loyalty,  and  which  is  in  reality 
no  just  criterion  at  all. 

Nothing  has  been  more  common,  as  a  defence  against 


266  THE    CHURCH    ON    DISLOYALTY. 

charges  of  disloyalty,  in  the  case  of  certain  clergymen, 
than  to  point  to  their  "  piety."  Our  "  Southern  brethren," 
the  rankest  rebels  among  them,  have  had  the  shield  of 
such  defences  thrown  around  them;  and  so  have  ministers 
in  the  Border  States,  and  some  whose  homes  are  farther 
ISTorth.  Such  a  man  "  cannot  be  disloyal ;  he  is  a  lovely 
character,  meek,  devoted ;  his  piety  is  a  disproof  of  the 
charge."  Many  persons  are  disposed  in  this  manner  to 
shield  disloyalty  under  the  garb  of  piety.  This  was  one  of 
the  views  presented  in  the  General  Assembly  in  vindica 
tion  of  Dr.  McPheeters ;  and  Dr.  Robinson,  in  his  paper, 
speaks  of  "  the  universally  admitted  character  of  Dr.  Mc 
Pheeters  for  piety,  prudence,  and  meekness."  Nor  do  we 
call  this  in  question.  We  judge  no  man's  piety.  Our  ob 
ject  in  referring  to  this  feature  of  the  case,  is  to  present  a 
Southern  standard,  that  we  may  perceive  how  these  men 
are  judged  by  their  friends.  We  shall  see  how  clearly 
the  "Confederate  General  Assembly,"  by  the  pen  of  Dr. 
ThornweH,  "  unanimously"  write  the  condemnation  both 
of  the  patriotism  and  the  piety  of  certain  clergymen  in  the 
Border  States  and  elsewhere. 

In  the  Address  of  that  Assembly  "  to  all  the  Churches 
throughout  the  earth,"  they  formally,  solemnly,  and  "  una 
nimously"  declare : 

We  cannot  condemn  a  man  in  one  breath  as  unfaithful  to  the  most 
solemn  earthly  interests  of  his  country  and  his  race,  and  commend  him 
in  the  next  as  a  loyal  and  faithful  servant  of  his  God.  If  we  district 
his  patriotism,  our  confidence  it  apt  to  be  very  measured  in  his  piety.  The 
old  adage  will  hold  here  as  in  other  things,  falsus  in  uno,  fateus  in  om 
nibus. 

What  a  withering  condemnation  is  this,  of  many  a 
minister  within  the  loyal  States,  whose  piety  should  be 
subjected  to  such  a  test !  From  the  stand-point  of  the 
nation  at  large,  indeed,  it  equally  condemns  the  very  men 


FALSE    CRITERION    OF    LOYALTY.  267 

who  wrote  and  published  it ;  for  their  "  patriotism"  may 
not  only  be  "  distrusted","  but  they  are  in  open  rebellion 
against  their  "  country,"  and  are  waging  a  traitorous  war 
against  their  "  race."  But,  without  allowing  that  ethics 
are  to  be  determined  or  applied  by  lines  of  latitude,  how 
pointedly  does  this  consign  to  hopeless  disrepute  both  the 
"piety"  and  the  "patriotism"  of  many  Border  State  men, 
and  of  some  farther  North.  "  Distrust"  of  their  u  patriot 
ism"  rests  upon  multitudes,  while  in  others  disloyalty  is 
proved  by  their  deeds;  and  this  is  the  "Confederate" 
standard  for  their  "  piety."  How  must  "  our  Southern 
brethren"  regard  such  men  ? 

Take  the  Border  States,  for  example.  They  have  stood 
by  the  Government,  by  overwhelming  majorities,  in  all 
their  elections.  And  yet,  many  citizens  within  them, — 
embracing  religious  men  and  some  ministers, — are  deci- 
d  dly  in  sympathy  with  the  "Southern  Confederacy,"  and 
others  hesitate  not  to  declare  it,  and  some  labor  for  its 
success.  Can  u  our  Southern  brethren"  do  any  thing  less 
than  despise  them  for  their  want  of  "  patriotism?" — and 
more  heartily  for  their  pretension  to  it  ?  Can  the  u  Confed 
erate  General  Assembly"  do  any  thing  less  than  despise 
their  "  piety,"  and  abhor  their  professions  of  it  ?  They 
have  done  both  already.  If  they  are  honest,  they  mean 
what  they  say. 

That,  as  a  general  rule,  both  politicians  and  clergymen 
in  the  Rebel  States,  heartily  despise  those  of  their  class  at 
the  North  who  manifest  sympathy  for  them  and  a  desire 
for  their  success, — and  who  are  in  an  underhanded,  cow 
ardly  way,  working  for  it,  in  opposition  to  the  Govern 
ment  under  which  they  live, — is  most  unquestionable,  both 
from  the  well-known  facts,  and  from  the  common  princi 
ples  of  human  nature.  They  would  trust  a  hated  "  Abo 
litionist"  sooner.  They  may  love  the  treason,  but  they  are 


268  THE    CHURCH    OX    DISLOYALTY. 

certain  to  despise  the  traitor,  just  as  the  English  did 
Benedict  Arnold.  We  hope  all  Northern  "  sympathizers" 
will  take  comfort  from  the  estimation  in  which  their 
"patriotism"  and  their  "piety"  are  thus  held  by  "our 
Southern  brethren." 

GENERAL   ROSECRANS'S    ORDERS. 

It  has  appeared  to  us  a  little  remarkable  that  certain 
military  orders  of  this  General,  and  one  in  particular, 
should  have  called  forth  a  condemnation  from  the  religious 
.press  which  we  have  seen  visited  upon  no  other  Federal 
Commander.  We  notice  it  here,  because  it  stands  con 
nected  with  the  subject  we  are  illustrating.  We  of  course 
looked  for  nothing  more  nor  less  from  Dr.  Robinson  and 
The  True  Presbyterian.  But  we  did  not  expect  to  find 
every  religious  paper  of  the  Presbyterian  Church  (we  now 
call  to  mind  no  exception),  and  possibly  some  of  other 
denominations,  join  in  this  special  hue  and  cry  at  the  time 
the  order  in  question  was  issued. 

What  was  the  purport  of  this  condemned  order  ?  It 
was  issued  at  a  time  when  the  Department  of  Missouri,  of 
which  General  Rosecrans  was  in  command,  was  exten 
sively  infested  with  guerrillas  and  threatened  with  rebel 
invasion  ;  when,  in  certain  parts  of  the  State,  and  in  and 
about  St.  Louis,  citizens  claiming  to  be  loyal,  and  others 
known  to  be  disloyal,  were  aiding  and  ready  to  aid  the 
invaders ;  when,  notoriously,  some  even  of  the  ecclesias 
tical  bodies,  when  assembled,  would  so  act,  as  the  authori 
ties  feared,  as  to  endanger  the  public  safety,  as  for  example, 
the  Methodist  Episcopal  Church  South,  and  others ;  when 
certain  religious  men  were  suspected  of  infidelity  to  the 
Government,  and  felt  the  requisition  of  an  oath  of  alle 
giance  to  be  an  indignity  and  a  burden ;  and  when  thou 
sands  felt  that  their  property,  and  the  peace  and  lives  of 


GENERAL    ROSECRAtfs's    ORDEHS.  269 

themselves  and  families,  were  at  stake.  It  was  under  these 
circumstances  that  the  General  Commanding  issued  an 
order,  which,  from  our  recollection,  was  to  this  effect : 
prescribing  an  oath  of  allegiance  to  the  General  Govern 
ment,  as  a  condition  precedent  for  sitting  and  transacting 
business  in  any  religious  court,  conference,  or  convocation, 
of  any  Church.  This  was  the  essence  of  the  order. 

This  order  was  attacked  at  the  time  by  religious  loyal 
journals,  and  was  condemned  by  certain  speakers  in  the 
late  General  Assembly  of  the  Presbyterian  Church  at 
Newark,  as  interfering  with  religious  freedom,  as  allow 
ing  the  State  to  determine  the  qualification  for  sitting 
in  a  court  of  Christ.  This  was  urged  in  discussing  the 
case  of  Dr.  McPheeters  before  the  Assembly.  It  was  said 
that  the  Presbytery  that  acted  in  his  case  "  could  not  be 
a  free  Presbytery,"  because  of  this  required  oath.* 

To  say  that  this  order  "  prescribes  a  qualification  for  a 
seat  in  an  ecclesiastical  court,"  is  one  of  those  statements 
which  may  convey  both  a  truth  and  a  falsehood.  It  does 
not  prescribe  such  qualification  in  any  improper  sense. 
The  Government  may  at  all  times  do  what  is  essential  to 
the  public  safety  ;  and  especially  is  this  true  in  a  time  of 
rebellion  and  civil  war,  and  within  the  immediate  sphere 
of  military  rule,  when  the  Government  is  contending  for 
its  life  against  enemies  within  and  without.  Of  what  is 
essential  in  any  emergency,  the  Government  and  its  agents 
must  be  the  sole  judges.  Nor  can  they  know  any  distinc- 

*  Dr.  Eice,  with  his  accustomed  caution,  said :  "  He  would  not  go  into  a  discus 
sion  of  the  military  order,  requiring  men  to  take  a  certain  oath,  in  order  to  qualify 
for  a  seat  in  ecclesiastical  bodies.  It  was  certain  that  many  good  men  could  not 
take  that  oath.  Had  he  been  there,  he  might  have  taken  it ;  but  when  he  went  to 
Presbytery,  he  was  bound  by  a  previous  oath  to  go  into  Presbytery  by  our  Book. 
One  principle  involved  in  this  case  is  the  validity  of  a  Presbytery  and  of  its  action, 
when  a  majority  of  the  body  were  not  there  through  restraint.  Wise  and  good  men 
could  not  take  the  oath  as  a  qualification  to  attend  Presbytery  ;  they  thought  it 
compromised  their  rights  of  conscience."— Philit.  Presbyterian. 


270  THE    CHUECH    ON    DISLOYALTY. 

tions  among  citizens  by  their  professions,  business,  or 
other  circumstances ;  they  can  know  and  deal  with  two 
classes  of  persons  only,  friends  and  foes,  the  loyal  and 
disloyal.  Nor,  if  they  would  save  what  is  at  stake,  can 
they  always  wait  for  treason  to  develop  itself  in  overt 
acts.  They  may  act  on  reasonable  grounds  of  apprehen 
sion,  with  regard  to  individuals  and  bodies  of  men.  He 
who  denies  this,  denies  the  most  settled  principles  of 
public  law  and  the  most  common  usages  among  all  civilized 
nations. 

Now,  how  do  these  rules  apply  to  the  present  case? 
General  Rosecrans  believed  that  ecclesiastical  convocations 
within  his  Department  needed  watching, — might  act,  or 
counsel,  or  concoct  disloyalty,  or  in  some  way  add  to  the 
perils  with  which  the  people  and  the  Government  were 
environed.  Any  man,  having  but  half  an  eye  open  to 
what  has  occurred  in  the  history  of  this  rebellion,  must 
see  that  there  may  be  ample  reason  for  such  apprehensions. 
What,  then,  does  he  do  ?  Does  he  forbid  the  meeting  of 
ecclesiastical  bodies  ?  By  no  means.  He  might  even  do 
that,  if  in  his  judgment  the  facts  should  warrant  it.  But 
he  allows  all  to  meet  when  and  where  they  please,  and  sit 
however  long,  Protestant  and  Catholic,  Jew  and  Gentile  ; 
only  prescribing  that  they  shall  take  an  oath.  What !  the 
State  prescribe  a  religious  test  for  the  Church!  How 
dreadful !  He  prescribes  an  oath  of  allegiance  to  the 
Government  of  the  United  States ;  that  Government 
which  protects  their  assembling  by  its  civil  and  military 
power;  and,  even  then,  allows  a  dispensation  to  all  who 
had  previously  taken  the  oath  prescribed  by  the  State 
civil  authority,  the  Convention  of  Missouri !  This  is  the 
whole  of  the  dreadful  thing. 

We  should  like  to  know,  on  what  principle  of  Scripture, 
public  law,  reason,  or  common  sense,  those  individual  men 


"  HONOR   TO    WHOM    HONOR."  271 

composing  a  body  calling  themselves  "  the  Presbytery  of 
St.  Louis,"  can  claim  exemption  from  such  a  requisition  ? 
It  was  just  that  which  might  be  made  of  a  body  of  mer 
chants,  shoemakers,  or  any  other  class  of  citizens  propo 
sing  to  assemble.  The  order  regarded  religious  bodies 
simply  as  citizens.  It  could  regard  them  in  no  other 
character.  It  specified  them  by  their  ecclesiastical  names, 
— Conferences,  Associations,  or  whatever  terms  were  used, 
— simply  as  descriptive  terms  of  certain  bodies  of  citizens ; 
just  as  it  might  have  said  of  others,  Knights  of  the  Golden 
Circle,  Red  Men,  or  "  Anacondas." 

If  the  members  of  the  Presbytery  of  St.  Louis,  or  any 
other  ecclesiastical  body  in  that  military  department, 
cannot  take  the  oath  prescribed,  so  much  the  worse  for 
them.  We  respect  their  tender  consciences,  but  they 
need  a  more  enlightened  conscience.  Without  any  dis 
paragement  of  them  personally, — for  they  are  mostly 
strangers, — conscience,  in  these  times,  like  some  other 
mental  and  moral  qualities  brought  into  action,  is  affected 
by  latitude,  particularly  where  it  respects  taking  an  oath 
of  allegiance  to  the  Government."  But  be  that  as  it  may, 
it  cannot  be  taken  as  a  rule  of  public  duty  for  the  Govern 
ment,  nor  be  made  a  criterion  by  which  it  is  to  be 
condemned. 

"  HONOR   TO    WHOM   HONOR." 

One  word  with  the  religious  press.  As  we  have 
already  said,  so  far  as  we  have  seen,  the  religic*is  press, 
with  one  accord,  condemned  this  order  of  General  Rose- 
crans  at  the  time  it  was  issued.  In  every  instance  of  this 
condemnation  that  we  saw,  the  fact  was  prominently 
brought  out  that  General  Rosecrans  was  a  Catholic,  and 
a  brother  of  the  Roman  Catholic  Bishop  of  Cincinnati. 
This  was  dwelt  upon  as  an  important  ingredient,  as  was 


2*72  THE    CHURCH    ON    DISLOYALTY. 

believed,  leading  to  the  issuing  of  the  order.  The  fact, 
also,  was  mentioned  in  at  least  one  religious  journal  in  a 
Metropolitan  city,  that  while  commanding  the  army  in 
Tennessee,  General  Rosecrans  never  disturbed  a  Catholic 
Church,  while  Protestant  Churches  were  freely  taken  for 
military  purposes. 

Let  us  do  justice  to  the  patriot-soldier.  Let  us  honor 
the  man,  if  honor  is  his  due,  who  took  the  demoral 
ized  army  of  General  Buell,  and  led  it  in  triumph  over 
the  terrific  fields  of  Stone  River  and  Murfreesbovo',  and 
finally  planted  it  in  Chattanooga.  We  claim,  personally, 
as  strong  an  adherence  to  the  Protestant  faith  as  any  of 
our  brethren  of  the  religious  press,  and  yet  we  honor 
the  brave,  whether  commanding  an  army  or  standing  in 
the  ranks,  who  perils  his  life  to  put  down  this  rebellion, 
and  save  the  national  flag  from  disgrace,  without  inquiring 
of  what  religious  faith  he  may  be. 

As  to  the  reports  from  Tennessee,  about  the  distinction 
which  General  Rosecrans  made  between  the  Churches,  we 
know  nothing,  one  way  or  the  other.  But  certain  things 
which  were  noticed  in  the  secular  prints,  just  after  the 
issuing  of  the  order  of  which  complaint  was  made, 
occurred  in  the  Department  of  Missouri,  and  which  we 
searched  diligently  for  in  the  religious  papers,  but  searched 
in  vain.  It  was  stated  that  General  Rosecrans  had  repri 
manded  or  suspended  two  Catholic  priests  in  Missouri  for 
their  disloyalty,  and  that  he  had,  for  the  same  reason, 
forbidden  the  circulation  within  his  Department  of  the 
well-known  Roman  Catholic  journal,  the  Metropolitan 
Record.  This  is  quite  enough  to  relieve  him  of  all  sus 
picion  that  he  was  impelled  by  any  sectarian  considera 
tions  in  giving  an  order  which  has  called  forth  the  strictures 
of  religious  journals  and  Church  courts. 

Let  all  men  be  honored  according  to  their  merit,  of 


DOOM    OF    TRAITORS. SELF-CONDEMNATION.  273 

whatever  religion  or  nation,  whether  Jew  or  Gentile, 
Greek,  Barbarian,  or  Scythian,  bond  or  free,  who  will  help 
us  to  save  the  nation  by  putting  down  the  most  godless 
rebellion  the  sun  ever  shone  upon.* 

DQjOM    OF   TRAITORS. SELF-CONDEMNATION. 

We  close  this  chapter  by  an  extract  from  Dr.  Thorn  well's 
Fast-Day  Discourse,  preached  in  Columbia,  South  Caro 
lina,  Nov.  21, 1860,  upon  the  National  Crisis  then  impend 
ing.  It  will  be  another  good  lesson  for  disloyalists.  We 
commend  it  to  their  serious  consideration.  If  it  is 
"pieaching  politics;"  if  it  presents  before  "traitors"  an 
awful  doom,  and  pronounces  their  "  damnation  ;"  if  it  seals 
the  destiny  of  him  who  penned  it,  and  of  multitudes  of  his 
co-laborers  in  the  South  ;  if  it  embraces  those  in  the  loyal 
States,  who,  though  they  have  not  taken  up  arms  against 
the  Government,  are  doing  every  thing  they  dare  do  to 
aid  those  who  are  in  arms  and  in  rebellion ;  all  we  have  to 

*  After  this  chapter  was  written,  and  the  stereotyping  was  nearly  completed,  the 
Bi'iliciil  Repertory  for  July  came  to  hand  (received  July  30),  in  which  we  are 
glad  to  find  one  for  whom  we  entertain  so  profound  a  respect  as  Dr.  Hodge  uttering 
himself  so  decidedly,  and  sustaining  the  propriety  of  General  Rosecrans's  order. 
On  reviewing  the  proceedings  of  the  General  Assembly  in  the  case  of  Dr.  McPhee- 
U-rs,  and  referring  to  the  reasons  for  non-attendance  in  the  St.  Louis  Presbytery, 
resulting  from  that  order,  he  says  :  "  To  us  it  seems  that  these  unfortunate  scruples 
are  founded  in  error.  There  was  no  jufit  ground  of  complaint  against  General 
Jtoxecrans's  order.  There  was  nothing  therein  inconsistent  with  the  inde 
pendence  of  the  Church  or  true  allegiance  to  Christ.  Suppose  the  small-pox 
had  been  prevalent  in  that  region,  and  the  authorities  of  the  city  had  issued  an 
order  that  no  one  should  attend  any  public  meeting,  ecclesiastical  or  secular,  who 
did  not  produce  evidence  that  he  had  been  vaccinated.  Would  this  be  an  inter 
ference  with  the  liberty  of  the  Church?  Not  at  all — because  the  object  sought  (viz., 
the  public  health)  was  a  lawful  object;  and  because  the  thing  demanded  (vaccina 
tion)  was  something  the  authorities  had  a  right  to  demand.  So  in  General  Rose- 
crans's  order,  the  object  sought,  the  public  safety,  was  a  legitimate  object;  and  the 
thing  demanded,  allegiance  to  the  Government,  was  admitted  to  be  obligatory.  In 
our  view,  therefore,  the  order  in  question  presented  no  lawful  or  reasonable 
objection  to  a  free  attendance  on  the  Presbytery."  And  more  than  this,  too:  "the 
thing  demanded,  allegiance  to  the  Government,"  was  "obligatory,"  whether 
"  admitted  to  be"  or  not. 


274  THE    CUURCIT    OX    DISLOYALTY. 

say  is,  that  it  comes  from  South  Carolina,  and  from  one  of 
tho  ablest  divines  in  any  branch  of  the  Church.  Though 
the  original  application  was  different  with  the  preacher 
from  that  now  given  it,  the  truth  it  contains  applies  none 
the  less  pointedly  to  all  who  are  disloyal  to  the  General 
Government. 

In  reference  to  our  position  as  a  nation  before  the  rebel 
lion  occurred,  to  our  power  and  destiny  among  the  nations 
of  the  earth -and  upon  the  welfare  of  the  human  rac°,  and 
to  the  guilt  of  destroying  the  hopes  of  mankind  in  this 
nation  by  rebellion,  the  eloquent  divine  thus  says : 

The  day  of  small  States  is  passed,  and  as  the  federative  principle  is 
the  only  one  which  can  guarantee  freedom  to  extensive  territories,  the 
federal  principle  must  constitute  the  hope  of  the  human  race.  It  was 
the  glory  of  this  country  to  have  first  applied  it  to  the  formation  of  an 
effective  Government,  and,  had  we  been  faithful  to  our  trust,  a  destiny 
was  before  us  which  it  has  never  been  the  lot  of  any  people  to  inherit. 
It  was  ours  to  redeem  this  continent,  to  spread  freedom,  civilization,  and 
religion,  through  the  whole  length  of  the  land.  Geographically  placed 
between  Europe  and  Asia,  we  were,  in  some  sense,  the  representatives  of 
the  human  race.  The  fortunes  of  the  world  were  in  our  hand.  We 
were  a  city  set  upon  a  hill,  whose  light  was  intended  to  shine  upon 
every  people  and  upon  every  land.  To  forego  this  destiny,  to  forfeit  this 
inheritance,  and  that  through  bad  faith,  is  an  enormity  of  treason  equalled 
only  by  the  treachery  of  a  Judas,  who  betrayed  his  Master  with  a  kiss. 
Favored  as  we  have  been,  we  can  expect  to  perish  by  no  common 
death.  The  judgment  lingers  not,  and  the  damnation  slumbers  not.  of  the 
reprobates  and  traitors,  who,  for  the  wages  of  unrighteousness,  have 
sapped  the  pillars  and  undermined  the  foundations  of  the  stateliest 
temple  of  liberty  the  world  ever  beheld.  Rebellion  against  God,  and 
treason  to  man,  are  combined  in  the  perfidy.  The  innocent  may  be 
spared,  as  Lot  was  delivered  from  the  destruction  of  Sodom ;  but  the 
guilty  must  perish  with  an  aggravated  doom. 

We  trust  that  for  decency's  sake  nothing  may  be  said, 
henceforth,  about  what  Northern  men  may  think  should 
be  done  with  "  traitors,"  when  Dr.  Thornwell  dooms  those 


DOOM    OF   TRAITORS. — SELF-CONDEMNATION.  275 

whom  he  regards  as  such  to  something  a  little  more  disa 
greeable  than  such  a  shower  of  fire  and  brimstone  as  came 
down  upon  the  cities  of  the  plain. 

We  of  course  understand  what  is  couched  under  the 
glowing  phrase,  that  "  it  was  ours  to  redeem  this  continent, 
to  spread  freedom,  civilization,  and  religion,  through  the 
whole  length  of  the  land."  We  have  shown  this  in  a  pre 
vious  chapter,  when  speaking  of  the  Slavery  Propagandists 
among  whom  Dr.  Thornwell  was  a  High  Priest ;  that  to 
"redeem"  the  continent  was  to  convert  it  into  slave  terri 
tory;  that  "freedom"  means  the  relation  of  master  and 
slave,  the  slave  to  come  from  Africa  if  he  could  be  obtained; 
the  master  to  be  a  white  man  if  "  rich,"  or  to  be  a  slave 
if  a  poor ;"  that  the  "  civilization"  was  to  be  univer 
sally  of  this  type  ;  and  that  the  "  religion"  was  to  be  that 
which  should  sanction  all  this  as  "  divine,"  and  any  thing 
preached  in  opposition  was  to  be  "  infidelity"  and  proof  of 
"  apostasy." 

Patriotism  and  treason  are  also  understood.  To  be  a 
"patriot"  was  to  give  heart  and  soul,  tongue,  pen,  purse, 
and  ballot  for  such  a  "  destiny"  to  one's  country ;  and  to 
be  a  "  traitor"  was  to  oppose  such  a  destiny,  or,  if  living 
at  the  South,  to  hesitate  and  falter  about  aiding  to  bring  it 
about.  And  then  so  glorious  to  us  and  so  philanthropic  to 
mankind  was  such  a  destiny,  and  so  correspondingly  deep 
was  the  guilt  of  all  who  were  "  reprobates  and  traitors"  to 
it,  that  their  "judgment  lingers  not"  and  their  "damna 
tion  slumbers  not,"  but  is  rapidly  approaching  in  the  form 
of  a  shower-bath  like  that  which  came  upon  Sodom ! 

Well,  gentlemen,  all  we  have  to  say,  is,  that  when  the 
actual  'trial  and  doom  of  "  traitors"  shall  come,  we  hope 
you  will  stand  up  to  it  like  men,  and  let  justice  take  its 
course. 

13 


276    SOUTHERN  PROVIDENCE  IN  THE  REBELLION. 


CHAPTER  VIII. 

SOUTHERN   PROVIDENCE   IN  THE    REBELLION. 

THE  doctrine  of  a  Divine  Providence  in  the  affairs  of 
men  is  a  tenet  of  both  natural  and -revealed  theology.  It 
has  been  the  common  belief  of  all  nations  and  all  times. 
It  has  been  taught  by  the  priests  of  every  sect  in  religion, 
received  by  the  sages  of  every  school  in  philosophy,  and 
sung  by  the  poets  of  every  age  of  the  world.  The  bard  of 
Avon  has  but  expressed  the  sober  judgment  of  mankind 
when  uttering  a  sentiment  which  we  may  take  in  its 
utmost  latitude  of  application, — 

There's  a  divinity  that  shapes  our  ends, 
Rough-hew  them  how  we  will. 

GOD'S     PROVIDENCE     EXTENDS     TO     NATIONS. 

This  providence  has  been  conceded  to  extend  to  nations 
as  truly  as  to  individual  men.  Without  the  light  of  Scrip 
ture,  this  has  been  an  accepted  truth ;  in  that  light,  we 
read  it  on  every  page.  It  is  concerned  in  the  birth  of 
nations,  in  their  progress,  and  in  their  downfall.  It 
attends  them  in  peace  and  in  war,  gives  them  their  rulers, 
awards  thoir  prosperity  and  glory,  and  brings  them  to 
honor  or  ruin.  In  the  rise  of  nations,  in  their  career,  in 
their  permanent  endurance  or  in  their  passing  away  to  give 
place  to  others, — an  unceasing  round  through  all  the  cycles 
of  time, — God  is  but  accomplishing  His  eternal  purposes, 
in  the  execution  of  which  "  He  doeth  according  to  His  will 
in  the  army  of  heaven  and  among  the  inhabitants  of  the 
earth." 


ITS    DESIGNS    TOWARDS    THE    UNITED    STATES.          277 


ITS     DESIGNS    TOWARDS    THE     UNITED     STATES. 

It  has  been  the  common  belief,  through  every  period  of 
the  comparatively  short  career  of , the  American  people, 
that  this  doctrine  of  providence  had  a  special  significance 
in  its  application  to  this  nation,  as  bearing  upon  its  own 
well-being  and  that  of  other  nations  of  the  world.  The 
time  of  the  discovery  of  the  American  Continent,  the  cir 
cumstances  of  its  colonization,  the  character  of  its  early 
settlers,  the  planting  here  upon  a  broad  basis  of  the  doc 
trine  of  civil  and  religious  liberty,  the  formation  of  a 
system  of  popular  government  under  a  written  constitu 
tion,  the  freedom  of  the  right  of  suffrage,  the  universality 
of  the  means  of  education,  the  unrestricted  protection  to 
the  various  forms  of  religion,  the  wide  domain  and 
unlimited  resources  of  a  country  extending  through  twenty 
degrees  of  latitude  and  fifty-five  of  longitude,  and  the 
unsurpassed  material  prosperity  which  has  been  developed 
in  the  departments  of  agriculture,  manufactures,  commerce, 
trade,  inventive  skill,  and  the  mechanic  arts;  all  this, 
which  had  placed  the  United  States,  with  her  more  than 
thirty  millions  of  people,  in  the  front  rank  among  the  most 
favored  nations  of  the  earth,  in  an  age  of  unparalleled  pro 
gress,  had  contributed  to  the  fond  anticipation,  indulged 
down  to  the  period  of  the  rebellion,  that  God  had  given 
us  a  high  destiny  to  fill,  of  honor  to  ourselves  and  of  good 
to  mankind.  When  foul  treason  plotted  the  overthrow  of 
the  Government,  the  hearts  of  many  failed  them.  They 
were  led  to  think  they  had  wholly  misinterpreted  the  pur 
poses  of  God,  however  plainly  they  had  supposed  them 
indicated  in  the  remarkable  facts  of  our  history. 

There  may  have  been  much  of  national  vanity  indulged 
in  these  glowing  prospects ;  but  many  were  led  to  hope 
for  their  realization,  prompted  by  the  purest  impulses. 


278         SOUTHERN   PROVIDENCE   IN   THE    REBELLION. 


THE     DEAD    FLY    IN    THE  OINTMENT. 

In  all  the  phases  of  our  history,  there  was  one  subject 
which  gave  pain  and  apprehension  to  many  of  the  more 
sagacious  and  reflecting.  That  in  a  Government  conse 
crated  by  the  blood  of  martyrs  to  liberty,  and  founded  on 
the  principle  announced  in  its  earliest  records, — the  free 
dom  and  equality  of  rights  of  all  men, — there  should  be 
incorporated  into  its  supreme  organic  law  a  concession  in 
several  specifications  to  the  bondage  of  millions  of  human 
beings,  was  an  anomaly  so  monstrous  as  to  provoke  the 
jeers  of  foreign  despots,  and  bring  down  upon  the  Model 
Republic  the  daily  growing  scorn  of  the  Christian  world. 

However  men  may  view  the  case  from  our  present  his 
torical  stand-point,  we  are  not  now  disposed  to  bring  any 
reproach  upon  those  great  men  who  founded  our  National 
Government,  for  admitting  that  element  into  its  structure. 
Surrounded  by  the  perils  which  succeeded  the  Revolution 
ary  War,  and  under  the  practical  failure  of  the  Articles 
of  Confederation,  they  found  that  "  a  more  perfect  union" 
was  essential  to  national  existence,  and  at  that  time  union 
in  one  nationality  could  only  be  secured  by  the  Govern 
ment  they  formed.  But  it  is  as  clearly  written  upon  the 
history  of  those  times  as  is  any  other  fact  of  the  period, 
that  many  of  the  leading  statesmen,  North  and  South,  who 
were  concerned  in  forming  the  Constitution  of  the  United 
States,  disapproved  of  slavery  as  an  institution,-  and  con 
fidently  counted  on  and  desired  its  termination.  King 
Cotton  was  then  in  his  infancy,  or  scarcely  born,  and  it 
was  not  then  dreamed  that  he  would  ever  come  to  the 
throne  and  usurp  so  wide  a  dominion.* 

*  For  proof  of  what  is  above  asserted,  that  "leading  statesmen,"  in  the  era  of  the 
formation  of  the  Constitution,  ''disapproved  of  Slavery,"  and  "counted  on  and 
desired  its  termination," — and  that  this  was  "the  common  sentiment"  of  that  day, — 
we  refer  to  the  speech  of  the  rebel  Vice-Prtsident,  quoted  on  page  49.  Mr.  Stephens's 


THE    IRREPRESSIBLE    CONFLICT.  279 


THE     IRREPRESSIBLE     CONFLICT. 

As  in  our  history  we  advanced  from  step  to  step ;  as 
slavery  became  more  profitable  and  more  expanded  :  as 
under  its  profits,  and  under  the  change  in  sentiment  regard 
ing  its  character,  it  became  more  and  more  exorbitant  in 
its  demands,  the  anxiety  concerning  its  efiect  upon  the 
destiny  of  the  nation  became  daily  more  intense.  Under 
the  later  developments  of  the  character  and  tendencies  of 
the  institution,  that  sentiment  which  has  sometimes  been 
attributed  to  the  President,  and  again  to  the  Secretary  of 
State,  and  for  which  much  reproach  has  been  heaped  upon 
them  by  the  rebels  and  their  "  allies," — that  it  were  impos 
sible  for  this  nation  to  continue  half  slave  and  half  free, — 
was  but  the  utterance  of  what  a  far-reaching  sagacity  saw 
to  be  inevitable.  It  was  no  incendiary  tenet,  as  shallow- 
brained  demagogues  have  termed  it.  It  was  the  simple 
announcement  of  a  great  fact  whose  certain  corning  already 
cast  its  shadow  before.  It  was  but  the  prediction  of  an 
"  irrepressible  conflict"  which  even  some  of  the  fathers  of 
the  Revolutionary  era  feared,  and  which  was  sure  to 
occur  in  God's  own  plan.  Its  undoubted  existence  in  the 
womb  of  time,  the  throes  and  convulsions  which  its  issuing 
forth  would  occasion,  would  have  been  all  the  same  if  they 
had  not  foreseen  and  declared  it.  They  did  not  create  it. 
They  were  not  responsible  for  it.  It  was  an  inevitable 
outgrowth  of  the  system  of  Government  our  fathers 
formed.* 


testimony  will  be  deemed  valid,  and  save  the  trouble  of  quoting  from  the  original 
sources. 

*  Thomas  Jefferson  announced  the  "  irrepressible  conflict."  We  at  present  state 
it  on  the  authority  of  the  Rebel  Vice-President.  In  his  speech  at  Savannah,  Georgia, 
March  21,  1SG1,  Mr.  Stephens  said:  "African  Slavery  as  it  exists  among  us — the 
proper  status  of  the  negro  in  our  form  of  civilization — this  was  the  immediate 
cause  of  the  late  rupture  and  present  revolution.  Jefferson,  in  his  forecast,  had 
anticipated  this,  as  'the  rock  upon  which  the  old  Union  would  split.'1  He  was 


280         SOUTHERN   PROVIDENCE   IN    THE    REBELLION. 


THE    DIFFICULTY    BEYOND    HUMAN    WISDOM. 

But  with  all  these  apprehensions,  the  wisdom  of  no  man 
in  Church  or  State  was  equal  to  grapple  with  the  subject. 
Slavery  had  so  interwoven  its  power  with  every  element 
of  our  politics,  had  so  completely  subsidized  every  depart 
ment  of  the  Government,  that  the  nation  stood  appalled  at 
the  threatening  danger,  while  no  one  could  see  our  way 
out  of  the  labyrinth  of  difficulties  by  which  we  were  envi 
roned.  Slavery  had  become  a  universal  theme  for  discus 
sion  ;  its  character,  bearings,  dangers,  extortions ;  but  no 
one  could  solve  the  problems  it  presented.  It  had  become 
the  pons  asinorum  in  politics  and  religion,  for  statesmen, 
philosophers,  divines.  We  quite  agree  with  Dr.  Palmer,  in 
his  Thanksgiving  Discourse  in  New  Orleans  : 

It  is  not  too  much  to  say,  that  if  the  South  should,  at  this  moment, 
surrender  every  slave,  the  wisdom  of  the  entire  world,  united  in  solemn 
council,  could  not  solve  the  question  of  their  disposal. 

This  is  a  sentiment  to  which  probably,  at  the  time  it  was 
announced,  the  mass  of  his  countrymen  would  have  sub 
scribed.  But  God  can  easily  do  what  man  cannot,  and 
that  too  through  man's  reluctant  agency ;  bringing  to  mind 
another  truth  in  the  same  discourse : 

Baffled  as  our  wisdom  may  now  be,  in  finding  a  solution  of  this  intri 
cate  social  problem,  it  would,  nevertheless,  be  the  height  of  arrogance 

right  What  was  conjecture  with  him,  is  now  a  realized  fact."  Those  declaimers 
who  deem  Mr.  Lincoln  or  Mr.  Seward  awfully  guilty  for  uttering  "that  hideous 
sentiment,"  should  vent  their  wrath  upon  Mr.  Jefferson,  and  other  statesmen  of  our 
early  history.  We  can  excuse  some  stump  orators  for  their  ignorance;  but  it  is  a 
sign  that  the  schoolmaster  ought  to  be  abroad,  when  the  Legislature  of  Jefferson's  own 
State  can  commit  the  blunder  of  ascribing  this  saying  to  Mr.  Lincoln  as  its  author. 
The  Richmond  Enquirer  of  July  4,  18C4,  publishes  an  Address  from  the  Legisla 
ture  of  Virginia  to  the  people  of  that  State,  in  which  this  sentence  occurs:  "Mr. 
Lincoln  was  the  author  of  that  hideous  sentiment,  that  the  States  of  the  Union  could 
not  remain  part  Free  and  part  Slave  States— that  they  must  be  wholly  Free  or 
wholly  Slave." 


HOPES    DASHED    AND    RAISED    AGAIN.  281 

to  pronounce  what  changes  may  or  may  not  occur  in  the  distant  future. 
In  the  grand  march  of  events,  -Providence  may  work  out  a  solution  undis- 
coverable  by  us.  *  *  *  If  this  question  should  ever  arise,  the  gen 
eration  to  whom  it  is  remitted  will  doubtless  have  the  wisdom  to  meet 
it,  and  Providence  will  furnish  the  lights  in  which  it  is  to  be  resolved. 

How  little  did  the  eloquent  divine  think,  when  he  was 
uttering  this  pregnant  sentence,  so  profoundly  true,  and  its 
realization  not  reserved  for  "  the  distant  future,"  but  appa 
rently  so  near  at  hand,  that  he  was  but  as  Balaam  before 
the  hosts  of  Israel,  with  a  blessing  on  his  lips  instead  of  a 
curse,  and  that,  as  God's  unwilling  Prophet,  he  was  to  bear 
so  distinguished  a  part  in  unravelling  the  mysteries  of  His 
inscrutable  providence,  and  in  "  working  out  a  solution" 
which  had  so  long  "  baffled  the  wisdom  of  the  entire 
world." 

HOPES    DASHED   AND    KAISED   AGAIN. 

When  the  rebellion  occurred,  as  we  have  said,  the  hopes 
of  many  regarding  our  national  destiny  died  within  them. 
They  verily  believed  we  were  now  to  be  dashed  in  pieces 
as  a  potter's  vessel,  and  to  be  blotted  out  and  known  no 
more  as  a  great  people.  They  looked  upon  the  war  as  the 
scourge  of  God  for  our  great  iniquities,  and  so  far  undoubt 
edly  they  were  right;  for  war  is  always  a  judgment  for 
sin.  But  it  began  early  to  be  believed  that  God's  ultimate 
design  was  our  purification  and  preservation,  and  that  to 
this  end  He  would  in  His  own  way  terminate  the  institution 
which  had  been  seized  upon  as  the  occasion  of  our  strife, 
and  that  when  this  were  accomplished  the  nation  would 
emerge  from  this  furnace,  and  be  prepared  for  a  higher 
career  than  were  otherwise  possible.  How  this  was  to  be 
done,  by  whom,  when,  and  where  a  beginning  was  to  be 
made,  were  problems  involved  in  darkness ;  but  as  events 
have  been  developed,  as  the  necessities  of  the  war  have 


282          SOUTHERN    PROVIDENCE    IN    THE    REBELLION. 

arisen,  as  time  has  rolled  on,  as  the  reverses  and  successes 
of  our  arms  have  alternated, — even  though  "  the  end  is  not 
yet," — we  think  it  is  not  rashly  interpreting  God's  pur 
poses  to  say,  that  in  His  providence  slavery  will  be  removed 
from  the1  land  entirely,  as  the  result  of  that  very  treason 
and  rebellion,  darkly  concocted  and  persistently  pursued, 
for  the  express  purpose  of  its  more  firm  and  expanded 
establishment.  If  our  Saviour  spoke  the  truth  when  He 
said,  "  All  they  that  take  the  sword  shall  perish  with  the 
sword,"  then,  as  slavery  unsheathed  the  sword  to  war  upon 
lawful  authority,  we  believe  it  will  perish  by  the  Avar  made 
in  the  Government's  defence. 

And  yet,  we  freely  admit  that  the  result  may  be  quite 
different  from  this.  Secret  things  belong  to  God  only. 
Slavery  may  be  yet  longer  preserved,  to  be  a  scourge  to  the 
nation.  What  scheming  politicians  may  plot,  what  timid 
statesmen  may  yield,  what  the  people  may  be  willing  to 
concede  for  the  sake  of  ending  the  war, — and  what  God's 
real  plans  may  be,  to  be  reached  through  all  these  sche- 
mings  and  plottings  and  concessions, — we  presume  not  to 
know  ;  and  still,  our  faith  is  strong  in  the  ultimate  result 
stated,  that  slavery  will,  as  a  consequence  of  the  rebellion, 
be  removed,  to  curse  the  land  no  more. 

PROVIDENCE    FROM   A   SOUTHERN   STAND-POINT. 

But  it  is  not  our  purpose  to  canvass  this  subject  at  pres 
ent.  We  shall  consider  it  at  some  length  in  a  succeeding 
chapter,  when  we  come  to  speak  directly  of  God's  provi 
dential  designs  in  the  rebellion.  Our  object  now  is  to  look 
at  providence  from  a  Southern  stand-point ;  to  note  some 
remarkable  things  in  Southern  literature  upon  this  theme, 
W7hich  the  rebellion  and  the  war  have  developed. 

The  leaders  of  the  rebellion  have  from  the  first  claimed 
for  their  cause  a  high  character  for  righteousness,  and  they 


PROVIDENCE   FROM    SOUTHERN   STAND-POINT.         283 

have  exhibited  in  its  behalf  much  religious  zeal  and  devo 
tion.  They  have  always  claimed  that  God  was  on  their 
side,  and  that  the  initiatory  and  subsequent  steps  of  the 
movement  were  undertaken  by  His  direction.  When  re 
counting  their  military  successes  (and  they  have  claimed 
a  victory  on  nearly  every  battle-field),  it  is  wonderful  to 
note  how  their  journals,  especially  the  religious,  have  ever 
found  in  current  events  striking  evidences  of  God's  favor 
ing  providence.* 

We  should  suppose  that  at  least  religious  men,  before 
making  such  a  wholesale  appropriation,  would  wait  to  see 
the  outcome ;  for  God  often  gives  temporary  or  apparent 
success,  where  the  final  upshot  is  an  utter  overthrow.  But 
so  elated  have  they  been  at  present  results,  that  they  have 
often  predicted  certain  triumph  ;  and  they  have  frequently 
so  put  the  case  as  to  be  willing  that  their  cause  should  be 
judged  by  the  determination  of  the  contest.  Here  again 
they  are  ethically  at  fault,  for  success  is  not  necessarily  a 
criterion  of  merit,  nor  does  virtue  always  conquer ;  and 
yet,  without  admitting  the  principle,  we  are  almost  willing 
to  rest  the  present  case  on  that  issue.  We  are  doubtful, 
however,  whether,  with  all  their  boastings,  they  will  so 
readily  abide  the  judgment  which  the  result  may  furnish. 
Already,  as  the  contest  progresses,  we  see  signs  of  mis 
giving,  and  less  confidence  expressed  in  the  favor  of  God 
than  formerly.  What  the  bearing  of  this  may  be,  even 

*  In  the  winter  of  1861-2,  after  the  campaign  of  the  first  season  of  the  war  was 
over,  an  "  Address  to  the  People  of  Georgia"  was  issued,  signed  by  Howell  Cobb, 
R.  Toombs,  M.  J.  Crawford,  and  Thomas  R.  R.  Cobb,  in  order  further  "  to  fire  the 
Southern  heurt."  This  passage  on  providence  will  illustrate  what  we  have  said 
above:  "  We  have  faith  in  God  and  faith  in  you.  He  is  blind  to  every  indication 
of  providence  who  has  not  seen  an  Almighty  hand  controlling  the  events  of  the  past 
year.  The  wind,  the  wave,  the  cloud,  the  mist,  the  sunshine,  and  the  storm,  have 
all  ministered  to  our  necessities,  and  frequently  succored  us  in  our  distresses.  We 
deem  it  unnecessary  to  recount  the  numerous  instances  which  have  called  forth  our 
gratitude.  We  would  join  you  in  thanksgiving  and  praise.  'If  God  be  for  ua,  who 
can  be  against  us  ?'  We  have  no  fears  of  the  result— the  final  issue." 

13* 


284          SOUTHERN    PROVIDENCE    IN   THE    REBELLION. 

as  modifying  their  ethics,  no  one  can  foretell.  That  they 
need  a  modification,  not  merely  upon  current  events  of  the 
war,  but  upon  matters  which  underlie  the  whole  structure 
of  human  life,  is  easily  made  apparent.* 

The  providence  of  God  has  been  so  much  dwelt  upon  by 
them  in  their  public  journals,  debates,  and  discourses,  and 
especially  by  the  clergy,  that  it  becomes  a  fruitful  theme 
for  meditation,  as  furnishing  a  marked  feature  in  the  moral 
phases  of  the  contest. 

IT   UPF.ETS   THEIR   THEOLOGY. 

One  of  the  most  noted  things  about  the  views  of  the 
clergy  among  the  rebel  leaders,  is  seen  in  this, — that  while 
their  devotion  to  treason,  in  the  interest  of  slavery,  has 
blinded  them  to  the  demands  of  duty  to  their  country,  the 
same  devotion  has  unsettled  the  foundations  of  some  of  the 
prime  articles  of  their  religious  faith.  Their  elaborate 

*  No  one  familiar  with  the  early  events  of  the  war,  can  forget  how  the  rebels 
exulted  that  the  fleet  sent  to  Charleston,  at  the  time  the  last  effort  was  made  to  pro 
vision  Fort  Sumter,  was  dispersed  hy  a  storm,  so  that  it  could  not  enter  the  harbor. 
This  gave  the  rebels  an  opportunity  to  complete  their  plans,  and  to  capture  that 
fortress  without  opposition  from  the  fleet.  Its  dispersion,  they  said,  was  "  no  acci 
dent,"  but  the  very  "  finger  of  God  was  in  it,"  and  a  sign  of  His  favor  to  them.  We 
accept  the  doctrine  ;  God  "  was  in  it,"  but  possibly  for  a  different  purpose  than  they 
supposed.  And  so  they  have  exulted  almost  ever  since.  Observe,  however,  one 
among  many  signs  which  have  occurred  more  recently,  where  serious  disappoint 
ments  are  laid  to  the  account  of  "accident,"  and  where  hope  in  "Providence"  is 
waning.  Remarking  upon  the  "invasion"  of  Maryland  and  the  threatening  of 
Washington  in  July  last,  the  Richmond  Enquirer  says :  "It  is  said  that  a  lucky 
accident  alone  saved  Washington.  Canby's  Corps,  from  New  Orleans,  arrived  at 
Fortress  Monroe  on  Saturday  night,  the  very  day  on  which  the  battle  of  Monocacy 
was  fought,  and  which  revealed  to  the  enemy  the  magnitude  of  the  clanger  that 
threatened  Washington.  Ordered  by  telegraph  to  that  city,  it  arrived  there  on 
Monday  in  time  to  prevent  the  capture  of  the  city,  and  to  hold  the  defences  until  the 
arrival  of  additional  corps  from  Petersburg  had  rendered  the  storming  of  the  works 
useless.  The  accidental  arrival  of  Cariby  saved  the  city.  Had  he  passed  up  to 
Grant,  or  been  delayed  in  hi*  arrival  one  day  longer,  Washington  would  have 
been  captured.  However  great  the  disappointment  may  be,  yet  much  has  already 
been  and  much  more  will  be  accomplished."  No  storm  delayed  Canby  "one  day 
longer."  God  "  was  in  it."  The  Richmond  Examiner  thus  refers  to  the  same  inva- 


IT    UPSETS   THEIR   THEOLOGY.  285 

discoursings  upon  providence  furnish  a  striking  illus 
tration. 

We  of  course  admit,  that  while  the  whole  world  agree 
in  holding  to  a  doctrine  of  providence,  men  often  differ  as 
to  the  doctrine  itself;  as  to  its  extent,  whether  general 
only  or  particular,  or  both  ;  whether  it  is  concerned  only 
in  the  great  affairs  of  the  world,  the  marked  and  unusual 
occurrences,  or  extends  to  all  events  alike,  great  and  small ; 
whether  it  controls  and  works  through  the  free  volitions 
of  men,  or  only  reaches  outward  things  ;  whether  its  ends 
are  accomplished  through  wicked  agents  as  directly  and 
efficiently  as  through  the  good  and  holy,  or  only  through 
the  latter;  and  a  thousand  Other  questions,  which  theolo 
gians  and  metaphysicians  have  discussed  more  or  less  from 
time  immemorial.  We  do  not  name  these  differences  to 
enter  into  any  examination  of  them.  Our  present  business 
is  more  simple.  The  divines  who  are  foremost  in  the  apo- 
logetical  literature  of  the  rebellion,  so  far  as  this  has  come 
more  immediately  under  our  observation,  and  from  which 
we  cite  examples,  are  of  the  same  school  in  theology  with 
ourselves.  They  have  received  the  same  standards  of 
faith,  and  when  adopting  them  received  the  doctrine  of 
providence  therein  set  forth,  which  substantially  is  that 
received  by  nearly  the  whole  Christian  world.  We  doubt 
whether  they  ever  would  have  so  widely  departed  from 
it  under  any  other  influence  than  that  of  this  rebellion, 

sion :  "  It  must  be  confessed  that  our  '  invasion'  just  at  this  moment  looks  like  one 
of  the  most  paltry  affairs  of  the  war.  Washington  was  not  taken.  Baltimore  was 
not  taken. '  The  Ynnkeeized  population  of  Martinsburgh  has  embraced  their  towns 
man  Hunter  again.  Not  a  bridge  of  the  road  between  Washington  and  Baltimore 
•was  burned.  The  road  itself  was  unbroken.  What  has  been  done  then  ?  What  has 
yet  been  obtained  by  these  opportunities, — Lynchburg  and  Washington, — the  like  of 
wliich  Providence  has  not  vouchsafed  since  the  first  year  of  the  war?  One 
house  has  been  burned ;  two  thousand  la-ad  of  cattle  brought  off;  Major-General 
Tyler  and  Major-General  Franklin  were  taken  prisoners  and  both  permitted  to 
escape.  *  *  *  Let  us  hope,  and  pray,  and  trust,  that  the  story  still  is  left  half  i 
told." 


286          SOUTHERN   PROVIDENCE    IN   THE    REBELLION. 

which  with  them  has  overturned  some  of  the  fundamental 
principles  in  morals  as  well  as  theology. 

THE  TRUE  DOCTRINE  OF  PROVIDENCE. 

That  doctrine  of  providence  is  thus  concisely  expressed : 
"  God's  works  of  providence  are  His  most  holy,  wise,  and 
powerful  preserving  and  governing  all  His  creatures ;  order 
ing  them,  and  all  their  actions,  to  His  own  glory."  This 
is  simple,  comprehensive,  and  unquestionably  founded  on 
the  teachings  of  Scripture.  Its  purport  is  plain.  It  sweeps 
the  universe.  It  leaves  nothing  without  the  control  of 
God.  Not  a  sparrow  can  fall  to  the  ground  without  His 
notice,  nor  is  a  hair  of  any  head  unnumbered.  It  embraces 
men,  angels,  demons,  races  of  men,  nations,  families,  and 
the  concerns  and  interests  of  each  and  of  all ;  and  directs 
ah1  things  for  great  purposes  of  good  to  those  who  love 
God,  and  for  glory  to  His  great  name.  If  the  Ruler  of  the 
Universe  is  indeed  GOD,  then  He  will  do  His  pleasure  in 
heaven  and  upon  earth,  and  no  being  or  thing  can  thwart 
His  plans. 

SOUTHERN    EXPOSITION    OF   IT. DR.   PALMER. 

!N"ow  observe  how  some  of  the  high  priests  of  the  rebel 
lion  preach  upon  this  doctrine.  We  will  let  Dr.  Palmer 
lead  the  way,  in  his  Thanksgiving  Discourse  before  referred 
to.  He  sets  out  with  the  undoubted  truth,  that  nations 
have  a  special  destiny  to  fulfil  in  the  designs  of  God ;  that 
"  a  nation  often  has  a  character  as  well  defined  and  intense 
as  that  of  an  individual ;"  that  "  this  individuality  of  char 
acter  alone  makes  any  people  truly  historic,  competent  to 
work  out  its  specific  mission,  and  to  become  a  factor  in 
the  world's  progress."  He  says,  also,  concerning  the 
crisis  then  reached,  that,  "  in  determining  our  duty  in  this 
emergency,  it  is  necessary  that  we  should  first  ascertain 


PROVIDENCE  FRUSTRATED.  287 

the  nature  of  the  trust  providentially  committed  to  us." 
Having  ascertained,  as  he  supposed,  what  the  special  trust 
of  the  South  was  in  the  plans'  of  God,  he  then  declares  it, 
and  gives  assurance  of  providential  security  in  its  execution, 
as  follows: 

The  particular  trust  assigned  to  such  a  people  becomes  the  pledge  of 
Divine  protection,  and  their  fidelity  to  it  determines  the  fate  by  which 
it  is  finally  overtaken.  What  that  trust  is,  must  be  ascertained  from 
the  necessities  of  their  position,  the  institutions  which  are  the  outgrowth 
of  their  principles,  and  the  conflicts  through  which  they  preserve  their 
identity  and  independence.  If,  then,  the  South  is  such  a  people,  what, 
at  this  juncture,  is  their  providential  trust  ?  I  answer,  that  it  is  to 
conserve  and  to  perpetuate  the  institution  of  slavery  as  now  existing. 

PROVIDENCE    FRUSTRATED. 

The  announcement  in  the  last  sentence,  declaring  what 
the  providential  trust  of  the  South  was  understood  to  be, 
is  the  substratum  of  the  whole  discourse.  We  do  not, 
just  here,  propose  to  dispute  so  remarkable  a  proposition. 
We  have  only  given  this  passage  as  opening  the  way  for 
exhibiting  some  views  of  providence  which  are  quite  as 
remarkable  ;  indicating  that  the  preacher  supposes  it  with 
in  the  power  of  man  to  frustrate  God's  plans,  and  betray 
ing  an  excited  fear  not  merely  that  He  might  do  so  in 
matters  then  undeveloped,  but  charging  directly  that  it 
had  already  and  most  grossly  been  done,  as  seen  in  the 
election  of  the  Chief  Ruler  of  a  great  nation,  and  in  the 
special  bearings  of  that  election  upon  God's  providence, 
showing  a  positive  interference  by  the  electors  with  "  the 
particular  trust  assigned"  to  the  South,  in  the  execution 
of  which  they  had  u  the  pledge  of  the  Divine  protection." 
But  let  the  preacher  speak  for  himself: 

All  that  we  claim  for  them  (the  slaves)  and  for  ourselves  is  liberty  to 
work  out  this  problem,  guided  by  nature  and  God,  without  obtrusive 
interference  from  abroad.  These  great  questions  of  providence  and  his- 


288          SOUTHERN   PROVIDENCE    IN    THE    REBELLION. 

tor y  must  have  free  scope  for  their  solution ;  and  the  race  whose  for 
tunes  are  distinctly  implicated  in  the  same,  is  alone  authorized,  as  it  is 
alone  competent,  to  determine  them,  it  is  just  this  impertinence  of  hu 
man  legislation,  setting  bounds  to  what  God  only  can  regulate,  that  the  South 
is  called  this  day  to  resent  and  resist.  *****  The  Most 
High,  knowing  His  own  power,  which  is  infinite,  and  His  own  wisdom, 
which  is  unfathomable,  can  afford  to  be  patient.  But  these  self-con 
stituted  reformers  must  quicken  the  activity  of  Jehovah,  or  compel  His 
abdication.  *  t  *  *  It  is  time  to  reproduce  the  obsolete  idea  that  Provi 
dence  must  govern  man,  and  not  that  man  should  control  Providence.  *  *  * 
*  *  These  fierce  zealots  undertake  to  drive  the  chariot  of  the  sun ; 
working  out  the  single  and  false  idea  which  rides  them  like  a  nightmare, 
they  dash  athwart  the  spheres,  utterly  disregarding  the  delicate  mechanism 
of  Providence;  which  moves  on  wheels  within  wheels,  with  pivots,  and 
balances,  and  springs,  which  the  great  Designer  alone  can  control. 
*****  sach  an  issue  is  af  length  presented  in  the  result  of  the 
recent  Presidential  election.  *  *  *  The  decree  has  gone  forth,  that 
the  institution  of  Southern  slavery  shall  be  constrained  within  assigned 
limits.  Though  nature  and  Providence  should  send  forth  its  branches 
like  the  banyan-tree,  to  take  root  in  congenial  soil,  here  is  a  power  supe 
rior  to  both,  that  says  it  shall  wither  and  die  within  its  own  charmed  circle. 
What  say  you  to  this,  to  whom  this  great  providential  trust  of  conserv 
ing  slavery  is  assigned  ? 

SOUTHERN  THEOLOGY  REBUKED  BY  SCRIPTURE. 

How  is  it  possible  to  explain  that  a  sincere  believer  in 
the  doctrine  of  providence, — and  Dr.  Palmer  is  unquestion 
ably  a  believer, — can  utter  sentences  of  such  impassioned 
earnestness  against  what  he  just  as  sincerely  believes,  in 
the  events  specified,  to  be  direct  infractions  of  God's  provi 
dential  prerogative  ?  Admit,  if  you  please,  every  specific 
thing  over  which  he  laments, — the  act,  the  design,  the 
tendency,  the  motive,  the  result, — and  still,  is  it  not  all  a 
part  of  God's  comprehensive  plan  ?  But,  more  especially, 
can  any  event  occur  among  men  which  is  more  clearly 
providential,  and  as  such  more  stupendously  grand,  than 
the  election  of  a  Chief  Ruler  by  thirty  millions  of  people 


SOUTHERN   THEOLOGY   REBUKED   BY    SCRIPTURE.     289 

to  preside  over  one  of  the  greatest  nations  of  the  earth  ? 
Does  Scripture  point  out  any  event  as  more  specifically 
providential  ?  "  The  lot  is  cast  into  the  lap  ;  but  the  whole 
disposing  thereof  is  of  the  Lord."  "  God  is  the  Judge ; 
He  putteth  down  one,  and  setteth  up  another."  "  He  re- 
moveth  kings,  and  setteth  up  kings."  Or  does  the  Word 
of  God  declare  any  thing  to  be  more  strictly  within  the 
purview  of  His  providence  than  human  legislation? 
"By  me  kings  reign,  and  princes  decree  justice.  By  me 
princes  rule,  and  nobles,  even  all  the  judges  of  the  earth." 
Or  can  the  sentiment  that  God  claims  directly  to  govern 
nations,  by  His  providence,  and  does  actually  so  govern 
them  through  the  lawfully  constituted  rulers  of  the  world, 
be  more  definitely  and  broadly  declared  than  it  is ;  and 
that  upon  this  ground,  therefore,  as  well  as  upon  other 
grounds,  it  is  a  heinous  sin  to  resist  their  authority? 
"Let  every  soul  be  subject  unto  the  higher  powers;  for 
there  is  no  power  but  of  God  :  the  powers  that  be  are  or 
dained  of  God."  Or,  on  the  other  hand,  can  any  thing 
be  found  in  Scripture  which  militates  against  the  position 
that  God  works  just  as  freely  and  efficiently,  in  accomplish 
ing  all  the  designs  of  His  providence,  through  the  folly  of 
men  as  through  their  wisdom ;  through  their  imbecility 
as  through  their  energy;  their  wickedness  as  their  holi 
ness?  Is  it  not,  rather,  directly  declared  everywhere  in 
His  Word,  that  He  works  through  and  by  all  these  charac 
ters  and  agencies ;  indeed,  that  He  makes  every  thing  bow 
to  His  will,  in  heaven,  earth,  and  hell  ?  "  When  He  giveth 
quietness,  who  then  can  make  trouble  ?  and  when  He 
hideth  His  face,  who  then  can  behold  him  ?  whether  it  be 
done  against  a  nation,  or  against  a  man  only."  "  All  the 
inhabitants  of  the  earth  are  reputed  as  nothing :  and  He 
doeth  according  to  His  will  in  the  army  of  heaven  and 
among  the  inhabitants  of  the  earth ;  and  none  can  stay  His 


290         SOUTHERN   PROVIDENCE   IN   THE    REBELLION. 

hand,  or  say  unto  him,  What  doest  thou  ?"  "  Our  Lord  is 
in  the  heavens :  He  hath  done  whatsoever  He  hath  pleased." 
"  I  am  the  Lord,  and  there  is  none  else ;  there  is  no  God 
besides  me :  I  girded  thee,  though  thou  hast  not  known 
me ;  that  they  may  know  from  the  rising  of  the  sun,  and 
from  the  west,  that  there  is  none  besides  me.  I  am  the 
Lord,  and  there  is  none  else.  I  form  the  light,  and  create 
darkness :  I  make  peace,  and  create  evil :  I  the  Lord  do 
all  these  things." 

PROVIDENTIAL   RULE    SUPREME. 

What  unspeakable  folly  is  it,  then, — unless  His  provi 
dential  rule  is  reduced  to  that  of  a  mortal, — to  talk  about 
the  "  impertinence  of  human  legislation,"  in  great  matters 
of  state  or  in  small,  interfering  in  any  manner  with  "  what 
God  would  regulate."  Such  legislation,  and  all  other, 
lies  directly  in  the  line  of  His  providence.  And  what 
consummate  folly  is  it  to  talk  about  man,  or  a  political 
party,  or  the  rulers  of  a  people,  or  the  whole  nation,  or 
all  the  creatures  of  God  combined,  "  dashing  athwart  the 
spheres,  utterly  disregarding  the  delicate  mechanism  of 
Providence;  as  though  any  power  in  the  universe, 
short  of  Omnipotence,  could  interpose  the  obstacle  of  a 
hair  to  obstruct  the  perfect  working  of  that  "  delicate 
mechanism !" 

When  these  great  providential  events  had  occurred,  in 
the  mighty  movings  of  the  people  of  a  powerful  nation,  it 
would  have  exhibited  a  sounder  theology  and  a  more 
reverential  piety,  and  contributed  to  a  brighter  fame  to 
both,  had  Dr.  Palmer  bowed  to  these  events,  and  detected 
in  their  occurrence  some  unsoundness  in  his  own  provi 
dential  theory,  and  the  dogma  of  a  "  divine  trust  to 
perpetuate  slavery,"  on  whioh  it  was  founded ;  instead  of 
making  God's  plain  workings  the  occasion  of  lashing  him- 


AN    EXPLANATION   NEEDED.  291 

self  into  a  tempest  of  indignation,  and  misleading  his 
flock  not  only  on  the  Scriptural  doctrine  of  providence, 
but  openly  urging  resistance,  instead  of  teaching  obedi 
ence,  "to  the  higher  powers;"  and,  as  a  result,  giving 
his  great  influence  to  plunge  the  people  into  troubles 
which  time  can  never  cure.  This  is  said  not  merely  in 
view  of  events  as  they  now  appear.  The  errors  which 
Dr.  Palmer  proclaims  lie  upon  the  very  surface  of  his 
discourse,  and  are  in  conflict  with  the  tenor  of  the  whole 
Word  of  God. 

AN    EXPLANATION    NEEDED. 

How  can  such  a  phenomenon  be  explained?  How 
could  a  minister  of  the  Gospel,  sound  in  the  faith,  make 
such  an  inexcusable  perversion  of  the  truth?  This  is 
just  as  easily  answered  as  would  be  a  similar  question 
upon  any  other  part  of  his  discourse ;  touching  his  urging 
an  open  disruption  of  the  Union,  at  the  declared  risk  of 
war,  and  openly  Lraving  and  defiantly  courting,  if  need 
be,  all  its  horrors ;  or  touching  the  cause  for  which  all 
this  should  be  done  and  braved,  in  order  to  discharge 
"the  trust  providentially  committed"  to  them,  "of  con 
serving  and  transmitting  the  system  of  slavery  with  the 
freest  scope  for  its  natural  development  and  extension ;" 
or  touching  the  time  when  these  utterances  were  made, — 
the  29th  of  November,  1860, — when  as  yet  politicians  had 
not  matured  their  plans,  and  his  own  city  and  people  for 
a  long  time  afterwards,  many  of  them,  were  strongly  for 
the  Union.  If  any  one  can  resolve  these  points  satisfac 
torily,  we  can  explain  all  the  difficulties  about  his  utter 
ances  upon  providence. 

There  is  probably  some  common  ground  on  which 
these  theological  vagaries,  and  much  else  that  is  appa 
rently  puzzling  in  his  sentiments  and  course,  may  be  solved. 


292         SOUTHERN   PROVIDENCE    IN   THE    REBELLION. 


A    SOLUTION   PROPOSED. 

We  think  there  is  no  difficulty  in  solving  any  of  the 
points  of  the  case.  The  theory  about  slavery,  which  is  at 
the  bottom  of  the  whole, — the  "  corner-stone"  of  the 
entire  structure, — had  stultified  jn  the  Southern  leaders 
every  thing  it  touched.  It  rooted  out  their  loyalty  to  the 
Union  as  soon  as  they  discovered  the  Union  could  be  no 
longer  serviceable  to  their  demands.  It  blasted  their 
sense  of  obligation  to  "  be  subject  to  the  higher  powers," 
just  as  soon  as  they  saw  they  were  no  longer  to  be  under 
their  own  control.  It  confused  their  perception  of  moral 
distinctions,  perverted  the  doctrines  of  religion,  and  gave 
false  glosses  to  Scripture,  whenever  slavery  was  the  topic 
of  consideration.  The  emanations  from  the  system  had 
become  so  ground  into  their  very  natures,  intellectual  and 
moral,  and  in  some  cases  literally  into  their  blood,  that 
they  could  stake  all  upon  the  issue  they  forced  upon  the 
country — loyalty,  honor,  glory,  historic  memories,  righte 
ousness,  truth,  life ! 


This  led  them  to  form  to  themselves  a  theory  of  provi 
dence, — a  path  for  God  to  walk  in, — which  exactly  chimed 
in  with  their  plans.  They  had  fondly  persuaded  them 
selves  that  this  was  God's  providence  instead  of  their 
own.  They  had  determined  for  themselves  the  special 
"divine  trust"  which,  under  this  providence,  they  were  to 
execute,  and  which  was  committed  to  them  for  their 
great  mission  as  a  people.  They  had  brought  all  their 
abilities  and  attainments,  which  indeed  no  one  can  well 
despise,  to  fortify  their  convictions  and  religious  fervor  in 
the  full  faith  of  these  dogmas,  in  spite  of  the  sentiments 
of  the  whole  Christian  world.  And  then,  when  they 


DR.    SMYTH    ON    SOUTHERN    PROVIDENCE.  293 

imagined  on  false  grounds  that  their  cherished  plans  were 
about  to  be  invaded,  through  a  course  of  events  as  grandly 
providential  as  God  ever  controlled, — they  failed  to  see 
the  pointing  of  the  Divine  finger,  but  rose  in  wrath  to 
invoke  upon  the  land  all  the  wild  terrors  of  civil  war. 
The  world  nowhere  presents,  all  things  considered,  a  case 
of  infatuation  which  can  equal  this. 

If  our  solution  is  not  satisfactory,  we  can  only  vary  it  in 
other  words,  which,  however,  are  but  an  embodiment  of 
all  we  have  said :  God  smote  them  with  judicial  blind 
ness  ;  and,  "  for  this  cause," — the  cause  which  lies  at  the 
bottom  of  the  trouble  in  the  land, — He  sent  upon  them 
"strong  delusion  that  they  should  believe  a  lie,"  that 
slavery  might  be  destroyed. 

SOUTHERN    PROVIDENCE    FURTHER    ILLUSTRATED. DR. 

SMYTH. 

The  peculiar  views  of  providence  which  we  have  pre 
sented  are  by  no  means  confined  to  Dr.  Palmer.  They 
are  those  commonly  entertained  by  the  clergy  of  the 
South  who  have  been  leaders  or  supporters  of  the  rebel 
lion.  We  give  an  example  or  two  more. 

Dr.  Smyth  claims  God's  providence  in  their  favor  from 
the  beginning  of  the  rebellion,  and  during  every  step  of 
its  progress.  Our  quotations  are  from  the  same  source 
often  here  referred  to,  the  Southern  Presbyterian  JRevicw, 
April,  1863.  Dr.  Smyth,  referring  to  the  great  change  he 
supposes  to  have  been  wrought  in  the  "  character  and 
conduct  of  such  men  as  Drs.  R.  J.  Breckinridge,  Spring, 
Hodge,  Jacobus,"  and  others,  says : 

To  this  blind,  fervid  fanaticism,  the  South  must  oppose  the  only  in 
vincible  shield,  and  that  is  faith,  faith  in  God,  faith  in  His  word,  faith 
in  His  omnipotent  providence,  faith  in  the  righteousness  of  a  cause  sus 
tained  by  His  immutable  and  everlasting  truth.  *  *  *  God's  mnni- 


294     SOUTHERN  PROVIDENCE  IX  THE  REBELLION. 

fest  presence  and  providence,  in  the  bloodless  and  yet  triumphant  vic 
tory  of  Sumter;  in  the  electric  sympathy  with  which  eleven  States 
rushed  into  each  other's  arms;  in  the  peaceful,  prayerful  unity  with 
which  a  Constitution  and  a  Confederation  were  ratified  on  earth,  and 
sealed  in  the  chancery  of  Heaven :  all  this  seemed  to  be  the  evidence  of 
God's  presence  with  us.  God  seemedthus  to  COMMAND  His  people  in  these 
Southern  States,  to  whom,  as  the  divider  of  nations,  He  had  apportioned 
their  inheritance,  and  imposed  upon  them  the  solemn  trust  of  an  or 
ganized  system  of  slave  labor,  for  the  benefit  of  the  world  and  as  a 
blessing  to  themselves,  while  imparting  civil,  social,  and  religious  bles 
sings  to  their  slaves ;  now  that  His  word  and  providence  were  denied,  and 
covenanted  rights  and  immunities  were  withheld,  and  the  annihilation 
of  that  system  of  labor  was  made  the  basis  and  cohesive  bond  of  a 
dominant  mobocratic  and  sectional  party,  inaugurated  as  the  Govern 
ment  of  the  United  States,  and  invested  with  absolute  power,  God 
now  spake  as  with  a  voice  from  heaven,  saying,  "COME  OUT  OP  THE 
UNION,  MY  PEOPLE.  From  such  withdraw  thyself,  for  all  the  men  of 
thy  Confederacy  have  brought  thee  even  to  the  border ;  the  men  that 
were  at  peace  with  thee  have  deceived  thee,  and  prevailed  against 
thee  ;  they  that  ate  thy  bread  have  laid  a  wound  under  thee  ;  there  is 
none  understanding  in  them."  The  heart  of  the  South  was  bowed 
before  the  Most  High,  the  Lord  God  omnipotent  that  reigneth,  and  with 
one  voice  they  cried  unto  Him  and  said  unto  Him,  "  If  thy  presence  go 
not  with  us,  carry  us  not  up  hence ;  for  wherein  shall  it  be  known  that 
we,  thy  people,  have  found  grace  in  thy  sight?  Is  it  not  in  that  thou 
goest  with  us  ?  So  shall  we  be  separated  from  all  the  people  that  are 
upon  the  face  of  the  earth."  Then  came  up  from  millions  of  hearts 
the  shout,  "  Go  FORWARD  !  FOR  GOD  is  WITH  us  OF  A  TRUTH."  But 
ABRAHAM  LINCOLN  neither  heard  nor  heeded  this  voice  that  spake  so  audibly 
from  heaven,  in  the  otherwise  inexplicable  events  that  were  occurring  around 
him.  lie  hardened  his  heart,  and  stiffened  his  neck,  and  would  not  let  the 
people  go. 

BLASPHEMY    AND    FANATICISM    SUBLIMATED. 

The  reader  will  make  his  own  reflections  upon  the 
"  blind,  fervid  fanaticism,"  which  must  have  prompted 
such  remarkable  passages  from  an  able,  scholarly,  and 
accomplished  divine.  The  transparent  blasphemy  of  this 
writing  is  in  a  high  state  of  sublimation  ;  deemin^  the 


THE   PROVIDENTIAL    CLIMAX. — DE.    STILES.  295 

whole  Southern  people  "  the  chosen  of  God"  as  the  Israel 
ites  were,  and  on  that  ground  applying  to  them  those 
words  of  Scripture  which  were  applied  to  His  ancient 
people.  The  likening  of  the  President  of  the  United 
States  to  the  king  of  Egypt, — and  of  course  regarding 
Jefferson  Davis  as  a  second  Moses, — are  essential  to  com 
plete  the  conception. 

The  most  satisfactory  solution  which  we  can  give  of  the 
mental  and  moral  state  of  a  man  of  Dr.  Smyth's  well-known 
abilities,  under  such  an  exhibition  of  them,  is  that  previ 
ously  given  in  reference  to  Dr.  Palmer,  and  applies  to  the 
mass  of  Southern  writers  upon  the  rebellion.  Their  views 
of  the  "  peculiar  institution,"  and  of  the  "  trust"  concern 
ing  it  "  providentially  committed"  to  them,  present  every 
thing  relating  to  the  contest  in  which  they  have  embarked 
for  its  sake,  to  their  minds  and  hearts,  in  an  aspect  so  very 
"  peculiar,"  that  they  alone,  of  all  mankind,  are  able  to 
perceive  things  as  they  see  them.  There  is  at  least  one 
peculiarity  between  their  present  condition  and  that  of 
God's  ancient  people,  which  is  true  in  fact :  "  their  minds 
are  blinded ;"  and  u  the  veil  is  upon  their  heart." 

THE    PROVIDENTIAL    CLIMAX. DE.    STILES. 

We  give  but  one  more  sample  of  this  remarkable  reli 
gious  literature  of  the  South.  In  some  respects  it  exceeds 
all  that  has  gone  before  it.  It  is  from  a  discourse  of  the 
Rev.  Joseph  C.  Stiles,  D.  D.,  a  Georgian  by  birth,  but  who 
was  formerly  settled  for  a  short  time  over  a  Church 
in  Cincinnati,  and  subsequently  was  Pastor  of  the  Mercer- 
Street  Church  in  New  York,  and  then  Pastor  of  a  Church 
in  New  Haven.  He  also  spent  several  years  of  ministerial 
life,  previous  to  these  several  Northern  settlements,  in 
Kentucky.  He  was  a  slaveholder  by  inheritance,  and  re 
moved  to  Kentucky  for  the  purpose  of  preparing  his  slaves 


293          SOUTHERN    PROVIDENCE   IN   THE    REBELLION. 

for  freedom,  and  at  that  time  deemed  freedom  better  than 
slavery  both  for  himself  and  them.  We  believe  he  eman 
cipated  them  all. 

On  the  breaking  out  of  the  rebellion,  he  joined  the  rebel 
leaders,  and  has  since  given  the  power  of  his  unwonted 
eloquence  and  fervent  prayers  to  the  attempt  to  erect  that 
treasonable  "  nation"  whose  "  corner-stone"  is  slavery. 
The  discourse  to  which  we  refer,  came  to  light  in  the  sum 
mer  of  1863,  and  is  entitled,  "  National  Rectitude  the  only 
true  Basis  of  National  Prosperity ;  an  Appeal  to  the  Con 
federate  States,"  founded  on  the  text,  "Righteousness 
exalteth  a  nation." 

THE  SOUTHERN  CONFEDERACY  TO  USHER  IN  THE  MILLEN 
NIUM. 

Dr.  Stiles  holds  to  the  doctrine  of  a  "  good  time  coming," 
believes  in  common  with  all  branches  of  the  Church  that 
a  millennial  day  will  yet  dawn  upon  the  world ;  and  as  in 
his  view  this  is  to  be  providentially  accomplished  through 
national  instrumentality,  some  one  nation  taking  the  lead, 
he  is  firm  in  the  faith  that  this  high  honor  is  to  fall  upon 
that  "nation"  which  glories  in  human  bondage.  But  let 
him  speak  for  himself: 

Why  should  it  seem  a  thing  incredible  to  you,  that  God  should  raise 
this  nation  from  the  dead,  and  raise  her  now!  A  freer  nation,  the  sun 
does  not  shine  upon,  and  you  know  it,  though  she  has  never  been  bla 
tant  about  free  thought,  free  speech,  and  free  soil.  A  nation  of  simpler, 
purer  Christianity,  thank  God,  earth  does  not  hold,  and  you  believe  it, 
though  she  has  never  been  as  boastful  as  some  whose  religion  bears  many 
a  sad  mark  of  corruption.  "Why  should  not  God  distinguish  this  nation, 
which  has  so  decidedly  distinguished  herself  in  His  behalf?  Why  should 
not  God  draw  nigh  to  a  people  who  are  wont  to  draw  nigh  to  Him, 
not  in  the  worship  of  established  ordinances  only,  but  whose  Constitu 
tion  itself  approaches  God  with  a  reverence,  you  believe,  never  similarly 
expressed  by  any  other  people?  Do  you  not  know  that  the  interpreta- 


THE  SOUTHERN  CONFEDERACY.  297 

tions  and  calculations  of  the  soundest  Christian  learning  justify  the 
faith  that  ere  long  the  approach  of  the  Millennium  must  begin  to  show 
itself  in  appropriate  premonitory  changes,  both  in  the  political  and 
Christian  world  ?  And  is  it  not  reasonable  to  suppose  that  God  will 
inaugurate  this  glorious  era  of  the  Church,  by  wheeling  some  one  nation 
out  of  the  ranks  of  the  world,  to  take  ground  for  God  and  man  under  the 
banner  of  the  Gospel  ? 

We  have  but  little  doubt  that,  in  the  course  of  God's 
providence,  at  least  one  thing  here  predicted  by  Dr.  Stiles 
will  prove  true,  though  not  in  the  sense  he  intends  nor  for 
the  object  he  states;  and  that  is,  that  this  rebel  "nation" 
will  ere  long  be  literally  "  wheeled  out  of  the  ranks  of  the 
world"  and  be  known  as  a  "  nation"  no  more.  That  God 
had  selected  that  "  nation,"  however,  which  boasts  of 
standing  on  an  ebony  "  corner-stone"  on  which  no  other 
nation  "  in  the  history  of  the  world"  ever  stood,  as  His 
grand  instrumentality,  and  Jefferson  Davis  as  his  Vicar- 
General,  in  ushering  in  "  the  Millennium,"  is  something 
we  had  not  before  supposed  was  recorded  in  ancient  pro 
phecy. 

Of  course,  this  glowing  prospect  opened  up  to  rebel 
vision  by  this  modern  Daniel,  who  puts  all  the  u  astrol 
ogers,  the  magicians,  and  the  soothsayers"  of  the  Church 
to  flight,  furnishes  a  basis  on  this  "interpretation  of  the 
dream,"  for  a  most  earnest  and  pious  exhortation  to  the 
people  to  come  up  to  the  help  of  the  Lord  against  the 
"  atrocious ;"  and  thereupon  Dr.  Stiles  implores  them  as 
folloAvs  : 

And  now,  at  a  period  when  the  atrocious  opposition  of  a  powerful 
nation  would  seem  to  invite  the  interposition  of  God  in  our  behalf,  tell  me, 
why  should  not  every  man  who  loves  God  or  his  country,  to  the  utter 
most  of  his  ability,  preach,  pray,  and  work,  to  arouse  our  population  to 
seize  thin  one  great  niche  of  time  in  the  history  of  the  world,  and  occupy 
that  national  position? 


298          SOUTHERN    PROVIDENCE    TN    THE    REBELLION. 


REBEL    VICTORIES    BY    MIRACLE. 

Certainly  ;  why  should  they  not  "  preach,  pray,  and 
work,"  as  never  before ;  and  especially,  when  the  prospect 
is  so  good  for  counting  on  the  direct  "  interposition  of 
God"  in  their  behalf?  As  the  circumstances  of  their 
extremity  "  would  seem  to  invite  the  interposition,"  can 
God  withhold  it  from  those  whom  Dr.  Smyth  regards  as 
his  "  chosen  people,"  and  from  that  "  nation"  here  specially 
selected  "  to  take  ground  for  God  AND  MAN  under  the 
banner  of  the  (Southern)  Gospel,"  and  to  usher  in  the 
"  Millennium"  of  universal  negro-slavery,  a  "  nation"  that 
has  "  so  decidedly  distinguished  herself  in  this  behalf?" 
God  cannot  withhold  it ;  He  certainly  will  interpose  by  the 
direct  might  of  His  omnipotence.  See  how  it  is  to  be 
done,  as  pictured  by  Dr.  Stiles : 

Oh,  how  far  you  live  from  the  light !  Why,  let  the  North  march 
out  her  million  of  men  on  the  left,  and  array  upon  the  right  all  the 
veteran  troops  of  England,  France,  Russia,  and  Austria;  and  bring  up 
the  very  gates  of  hell  in  all  their  strength  to  compose  the  centre  of  her 
grand  invading  army.  "What  then  ?  Why,  every  thing  in  God  and  from 
God  assures  us  that  these  Confederate  States  would  hear  a  voice  from 
heaven:  "  The  battle  is  not  yours  but  mine.  Stand  ye  still  and  see  the 
salvation  of  the  Lord."  If  they  dared  to  advance  one  step,  a  righteous 
and  an  angry  God  would  fire  off  upon  the  aliens  terrible  thunder  that 
angel  ears  never  heard,  and  shoot  out  upon  them  vengeful  fires  and 
lightnings  that  cherubic  vision  never  saw,  and  fling  down  upon  them 
cataracts  of  angry  power  that  hell  herself  never  felt,  and  if  necessary  to 
our  deliverance,  shake  the  very  earth  from  under  their  feet  1 

A    NEW    SIEGE    OF    JERICHO. 

It  is  somewhat  difficult,  but  we  finally  recover  our  breath 
again ! — and  being  able  to  speak  once  more,  we  have  a 
suggestion  or  two  to  make  to  those  Southern  Christians 
and  to  their  preacher,  founded  upon  his  own  words  :  "  Oh, 
how  far  you  live  from  the  light!" 


A    NEAV    SIEGE    OF    JERICHO.  299 

Our  first  suggestion  is  this  :  If  "  every  thing  in  God  and 
from  God  assures"  you  of  such  an  easy  and  complete  vic 
tory  over  your  foes,  and  by  such  means,  why  don't  you 
lay  aside  such  expensive  and  cumbrous  things  as  shot  and 
shell  and  canister,  and  imitating  your  prototypes,  God's 
ancient  chosen  people,  march  out  with  "  rams'  horns"  as 
they  did  at  the  siege  of  Jericho  ?  You  would  be  saved 
an  amazing  amount  of  u  transportation,"  and  the  whole 
thing  would  be  done  in  a  single  week,  and  then  we  should 
have  "  peace,"  for  which  we  all  sigh. 

You  of  course,  as  you  read  your  Bibles,  know  how  it 
was  done  in  the  olden  time.  "  Seven  priests"  were  com 
manded  by  Joshua  to  "  bear  before  the  ark  seven  trumpets 
of  rams'  horns."  Let  General  Lee,  your  modern  Joshua, 
select  Dr.  Stiles  to  head  the  list  of  "  priests,"  with  Drs. 
Palmer,  Smyth,  Sehon,  Fuller,  Adger,  and  Moore ;  we 
should  certainly  name  Bishop  Polk  and  Dr.  Thorn  well, 
had  they  not  gone  to  their  final  account.  The  "  ark"  will 
of  course  contain  a  copy  of  the  Constitution  of  the  "  Con 
federate  States  of  America"  which  founds  your  nation  on 
the  "  corner-stone"  of  human  bondage.  As  the  whole 
thing  would  have  failed  at  Jericho  had  not  the  priests 
taken  the  "ark"  into  which  God  had  previously  com 
manded  "  the  testimony"  to  be  put,  so  it  is  essential  that 
your  "  ark"  should  contain  "  the  testimony"  which  you 
have  given  to  the  world  in  your  Constitution.  The 
ancient  "  ark"  was  "  overlaid  with  pure  gold  within  and 
without."  As  gold  may  be  scarce  with  you,  it  may  be 
covered  and  lined  with  "  Confederate  Scrip"  of  the  latest 
issue. 

Thus  prepared,  let  the  Confederate  armies  "  compass" 
the  camp  of  their  enemies,  followed  by  the  priests,  "bear 
ing  the  ark  and  blowing  the  trumpets,"  once  a  day  for  six 
days,  and  on  the  seventh  day  go  round  seven  times  ;  and 
14 


300          SOUTHERN    PROVIDENCE    IN    THE    REBELLION. 

having  done  this,  you  may  be  able  to  hear  the  voice  from 
heaven,  which  Dr.  Stiles  said  you  would,  and  be  able  to 
witness  the  destruction  of  all  the  Yankee  armies  by  those 
"cataracts  of  angry  power"  of  which  he  spake.  It  may 
})e — have  you  ever  thought  of  it  ? — that  the  reason  why 
you  have  not  already  been  completely  successful  over 
them,  is,  that  you  have  counted  on  God's  '* interposition" 
without  using  God's  means.  Beware  of  such  presumption, 
hereafter.  We  recommend  this  amendment  in  your 
"  strategy."  But  one  thing,  especially,  bear  in  mind. 
Don't  u  shout"  the  victory  too  soon.  This  was  a  point 
on  which  the  people  were  particularly  cautioned  at  the 
taking  of  Jericho  under  the  ancient  Joshua. 

THE  CONFEDERATE  ARMAGEDDON. 

We  have  another  suggestion,  which  will  still  further 
illustrate  the  good  policy  of  your  adopting  this  ancient 
mode  of  warfare.  As  "every  thing  in  God  and  from  God 
assures"  you  that  you  can  whip  all  mankind  and  Satan's 
hosts  into  the  bargain, — with  the  United  States  composing 
the  "left"  wing,  the  great  European  Powers  the  "right" 
wing,  and  "the  gates  of  hell"  the  "  centre"  of  the  grand 
army, — why  not  call  the  "  priests,"  get  the  "  rams'  horns," 
and  make  a  final  end  of  all  your  enemies  at  once?  You 
will  then  have  a  fair  field  for  your  Slavery  Propagandism. 
You  can  then  carry  out  universally,  the  "  Christian  Slavery" 
which  is  so  pleasing  to  the  mind  and  heart  of  Drs.  Arm 
strong,  Thorn  well,  Palmer,  and  the  rest  of  "  our  Southern 
brethren"  who  mourn  and  pray  over  "free  society;" 
making  masters  of  whites  who  are  "rich,"  and  slaves  of 
whites  who  are  "poor." 

And  there  is  another  element  of  encouragement.  There 
would  unquestionably  be  a  wholesale  desertion  to  the 
Confederate  standard.  The  moment  the  rich  music  of  the 


THE    CONFEDERATE    ARMAGEDDON.  301 

blast  from  the  trumpets  of  the  priests  carrying  the  new 
"corner-stone"  faith  in  the  "Confederate  ark,"  should 
reverberate  along  the  line,  the  entire  "  centre"  would  go 
over  to  you  in  a  body.  They  are  one  with  you  now,  in 
heart,  and  only  want  the  opportunity,  to  be  arrayed  with 
you  bodily.  You  would  then  have  a  triumph  which  would 
cast  all  the  Jerichos  of  the  world  into  oblivion.  Would 
it  not  be  the  battle  of  the  Millennial  Armageddon  ? 

One  of  your  preachers,  you  know,  the  Rev.  Mr.  Baldwin, 
wrote  a  volume,  a  few  years  ago,  entitled  "Armageddon." 
He  imported  the  plain  of  Esdraelon  from  Palestine,  and 
located  the  scene  of  the  battle  in  the  Mississippi  Valley. 
According  to  Scripture,  God's  "  chosen  people"  are  to 
fight  this  battle,  and  against  them  are  to  be  arrayed  all 
intidel  nations  and  all  the  corrupt  ecclesiastical  hierarchies 
of  the  world.  Now,  as  you  are  the  "  chosen  people,"  as 
you  regard  your  nation  the  only  righteous  one  among 
men, — "  whose  Constitution  itself  approaches  God  with  a 
reverence  never  similarly  expressed  by  any  other  people," 
especially  the  "corner-stone"  article,  as  Mr.  Stephens 
claims, — as  you  regard  all  other  nations  "  infidel"  and  all 
other  Churches  "  apostate,"  because  they  are  wedded  to 
"  free  society,"  and  as  you  are  to  bring  in  the  Millennium, 
you  undoubtedly  believe  you  are  to  fight  the  battle  of 
Armageddon.  The  "  terrible  thunder/'  and  the  "  vengeful 
fires  and  lightnings,"  and  the  "cataracts  of  angry  power," 
of  which  Dr.  Stiles  speaks,  exactly  corresponding  with  the 
imagery  of  the  Seer  of  Patmos,  and  the  "  direct  inter 
position  of  God"  which  is  claimed,  all  show  that  the  great 
Millennial  battle  is  meant  by  the  preacher.  Only  amend 
your  "  strategy,"  then,  in  the  manner  here  respectfully 
suggested,  and, — with  the  desertion  to  your  ranks  of  the 
"  centre"  in  a  body, — you  undoubtedly  will  triumph. 

Then  the  whole  earth  will  rejoice  that  the  long-wished- 


302          SOUTHERN    PROVIDENCE    IX    THE    REBELLION. 

for  Millennial  Day  has  dawned ! — Avith  universal  slavery 
for  the  "  poor,"  mastership  for  the  "  rich,"  all  Yankees 
destroyed,  the  Confederates  everywhere  triumphant,  and 
Jefferson  Davis  God's  Vicar-General  over  the  world ! 

But  seriously, — Do  we  need  any  better  evidence  that 
the  leaders  of  the  rebellion  are  demented,  than  that  here 
furnished,  in  such  religious  rhapsodies  as  these  leading 
divines  indulge  in?  If  these  were  emanations  from  ordi 
nary  men,  they  might  be  passed  by  as  idle  breath  ;  but 
they  come  from  the  greatest  intellects  and  the  ripest 
scholarship  among  Southern  Churchmen.  That  they  are 
uttered  to  "fire  the  Southern  heart"  is  undoubtedly  true; 
and  yet,  that  these  men  are  sincere  we  as  little  doubt. 
That  they  have  had  more  influence  over  the  more  serious 
portion  of  society,  in  urging  on  and  keeping  up  the  spirit 
of  the  war,  than  any  other  class,  is  confessed  by  Southern 
politicians  and  patent  to  the  world.  Our  solution  of  the 
matter  is,  that  they  are  judicially  blinded;  given  over  to 
strong  delusion  to  believe  a  lie,  yea,  even  a  legion  of  lies ; 
and  that,  through  their  delusions,  the  God  of  universal 
providence  is  working  out  great  purposes  of  good  to  man 
kind  and  glory  to  His  name. 


PROVIDENTIAL    DESIGNS    IN   THE    REBELLION.         303 


CHAPTER  IX. 

PROVIDENTIAL   DESIGNS  IN   THE   KEBELLION. 


have  given  in  the  previous  chapter  the  doctrine  of 
Divine  Providence,  and  the  remarkable  perversions  which 
are  made  of  it  by  writers  interested  in  the  cause  of  per 
petuating  human  bondage  by  a  wicked  rebellion.  We  pro 
pose  here  to  set  forth  what  we  regard  as  some  among  the 
true  purposes  of  God,  now  in  process  of  being  wrought 
out,  by  the  stupendous  events  which  are  occurring  in  this 
nation. 

If  we  speak  with  confidence,  it  is  only  because  our 
convictions  are  strong  and  our  faith  abiding.  At  the 
same  time,  we  claim  no  infallibility,  in  judging  of  events, 
either  present  or  future.  We  say  here,  once  for  all,  that 
we  only  utter  our  opinions  upon  what  we  regard  as  God's 
designs.  To  them  we  are  entitled.  We  allow  others  the 
enjoyment  of  theirs.  We  aim  only  to  interpret  rather 
than  predict,  and  give  merely  our  best  judgment  of  some 
things  which  we  think  the  present  contest  is  likely  to 
work  out. 

The  true  doctrine  of  providence,  as  entertained  by  the 
common  consent  of  Christendom,  embraces,  among  others, 
these  elements  :  it  includes  all  beings  and  all  things  ;  and 
through  all,  God  is  working  out  great  purposes  of  ultimate 
good  to  the  world  and  glory  to  Himself. 

If  these  positions  embody  the  truth,  they  may  be  applied 
to  the  rebellion  now  in  progress,  and  to  the  efforts  mads 
for  its  suppression.  God  is  controlling  all  agencies  and 
events  at  work  in  the  contest,  and  out  of  all  He  will  bring 


304  PROVIDENTIAL    DESIGNS    IX    THE    REBELLION. 

good  to  mankind  and  glory  to  Himself.  No  doubt  great 
errors  may  be  committed  in  attempting  to  interpret  God's 
providence,  so  as  certainly  to  declare,  beforehand,  what 
He  specifically  intends  in  a  given  event,  or  in  a  series  or 
long  course  of  events.  We  think  that  here  Southern  wri 
ters  have  deceived  themselves,  and  have  gone  counter  to  one 
of  the  sound  canons  for  interpreting  God's  will,  whether 
referring  to  certain  portions  of  His  word  or  to  His  provi 
dence.  It  is  a  principle  of  prophecy,  that  rarely,  if  ever, 
is  it  so  plain  that  it  can  fully  be  determined  before  its  ful 
filment.  It  is  so  with  providence ;  we  must  wait  for  the 
issue,  in  most  cases,  before  being  able  to  comprehend  fully 
the  design.  But  as  in  certain  prophecies  there  are  way- 
marks  which  may  guide  the  sincere  inquirer  to  an  approxi 
mately  true  interpretation  before  their  fulfilment,  and  lights 
which  cast  a  glimmer  of  truth  along  the  path  he  would 
travel,  and  thus  he  is  profited  in  their  study  and  enabled 
to  enter  the  vestibule  of  the  temple  which  is  ultimately  to 
be  opened  to  the  full  view  of  all  men  ;  so  in  providence, 
the  honest  and  devout  student,  aided  by  God's  word  and 
Spirit,  may  be  able  to  indicate  with  some  approach  to 
truthfulness,  some,  at  least,  of  the  grand  results  which  the 
providence  of  God,  as  illustrated  by  daily  occurring  and 
consecutive  events,  is  designed  to  reach. 

While  we  would  guard  against  the  folly  of  committing 
the  same  error  into  which  Southern  writers  have  fallen, 
there  is  a  marked  difference  in  the  position  they  assume 
upon  the  grand  designs  of  providence  as  applied  to  the 
present  contest,  and  that  which  we  propose  to  take,  which 
may  aid  in  their  solution,  even  though  we  should  occupy 
precisely  the  same  ground  with  them,  or  they  with  us,  in 
reference  to  the  canon  of  interpretation  to  which  we  have 
adverted.  The  sum  and  essence  of  the  "  trust"  which 
they  regard  as  "  providentially  committed"  to  them,  and 


SLAVERY    TO    BE    TERMINATED.  305 

the  design  of  God  contemplated  in  their  secession, — to 
"conserve  and  perpetuate"  human  bondage, — we  regard  as 
monstrous  and  diabolical,  and  such  an  application  as  but 
little  if  any  thin^  short  of  blasphemous.  .  On  the  other 
hand,  as  regards  this  particular  element  in  the  case,  we 
interpret  God's  providence  as  tending  to  just  the  contrary 
result, — one  of  good, — of  freedom  and  elevation  to  the 
negro  race,  instead  of  designed  to  render  their  bondage 
more  secure,  and  their  freedom  and  elevation  utterly  and 
forever  hopeless. 

As  we  differ  in  our  interpretation,  and  as  those  who 
disagree  with  us  claim  as  much  ability  to  ascertain  God's 
will  as  ourselves,  we  know  of  no  better  umpire  to  decide 
between  us  than  this  :  for  the  present,  the  common  judg 
ment  of  Christendom  ;  and  at  length,  the  final  issue  of  the 
contest.  There  we  most  willingly  leave  it,  and  are  willing 
to  abide  the  issue. 

SLAVERY    TO    BE    TERMINATED. 

This  preliminary  course  of  thought  brings  us  to  notice 
this  point  first,  as  among  the  designs  of  God  in  His  provi 
dence.  It  is  quite  proper  that  it  should  have  this  place, 
as  for  the  sake  of  perpetuating  si ; very  the  rebellion  was 
undertaken,  and  as  a  means  for  its  suppression  the  Gov 
ernment  has  decreed  the  destruction  of  slavery.  The 
point  now  is  to  inquire,  on  which  side  of  the  contest  the 
purposes  of  God  are  arrayed.  This  can  only  be  deter 
mined,  at  the  present  historic  point,  from  the  principles 
which  are  involved,  and  from  the  events  which  have  oc 
curred  and  are  now  in  process  of  being  wrought  out  In 
taking  the  position  lh;it  God  designs  the  termination  of 
slavery  in  this  land,  as  one  result  of  the  rebellion,  we 
mean  that  He  designs  its  termination  forever ;  and  in  giv 
ing  what  we  deem  the  evidences  which  support  it,  we 


306  PROVIDENTIAL    DESIGNS    IN    THE    REBELLION. 

would  construe  them  in  proper  subordination  to  the  canon 
we  have  stated. 

It  is  our  opinion  that  the  termination  or  the  perpetua 
tion  of  slavery,  is  by  no  means  necessarily  connected 
with  the  result  of  the  war.  In  any  event  we  believe  the 
doom  of  slavery  sealed. 

If  the  Union  shall  be  preserved  in  the  complete  triumph 
of  the  national  arms,  slavery  will  be  ended.  It  needs  no 
seer  to  declare  the  foregone  conclusion  of  the  American 
people  upon  this  point.  They  will  admit  no  compromise ; 
it  is  beyond  the  reach  of  party  jugglery ;  the  great  party 
of  the  people  will  say,  and  adhere  to  the  saying,  that  on 
the  reinstatement  of  the  national  authority  over  the  terri 
tory  of  the  entire  Union,  that  element  of  our  national  life 
which  has  wrought  such  havoc,  shall  die  the  death.  They 
will  never  permit  the  possibility  of  a  repetition  of  so  foul 
a  treason  in  its  name.  Once  in  a  thousand  years, — or, 
once  for  all  time, — is  quite  sufficient  for  such  an  issue 
within  the  bounds  of  the  same  nation.  The  memorial's  of 
the  rebellion  which  the  current  age  will  embalm,  and  the 
materials  out  of  which  the  future  historian  will  elaborate 
the  truth,  will  present  a  record  in  such  hues  of  the  deeds 
done  for  the  sake  of  slavery,  that  the  memory  of  them 
will  be  wrought  too  deeply  into  the  soul  of  each  succes 
sive  generation  to  admit  of  its  being  possible  that  negro 
slavery  can  ever  be  reinstated  within  the  domain  of  the 
Union.  At  least,  this  is  our  opinion. 

MANNER    OF    ITS    TERMINATION. 

The  precise  manner  in  which  the  institution  will  be 
universally  terminated,  and  its  termination  maintained,  in 
the  event  of  the  preservation  of  our  nationality,  it  is  not 
material  here  to  dwell  upon,  thougli  we  do  not  doubt  the 
ultimate  point  which  will  be  reached.  It  will  be  by  an 


MANXEK    OF    ITS    TERMINATION.  307 

amendment  of  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States. 
Although  that  measure  has  been  for  the  present  defeated 
in  the  House  of  Representatives,  and  may  not  be  passed 
till  a  new  Congress  shall  be  elected,  or  possibly  may  be 
even  longer  deferred,  it  cannot  admit  of  doubt  that  when 
the  people  shall  have  determined  on  prohibiting  the  institu 
tion  forever,  the  form  and  substance  of  the  prohibition 
will  be  embodied  in  the  supreme  organic  law,  the  most 
sacred  depository  of  the  popular  will. 

In  the  mean  time,  and  while  waiting  for  this  consumma 
tion,  it  may  be  accomplished  in  all  the  Rebel  States  by  an 
Act  of  Congress;  or  it  may  occur  simply  under  the 
Proclamation  of  the  President  already  issued ;  or  it  may 
end  through  the  measures  which  the  civil  power  may  take 
for  receiving  the  revolted  States  to  their  proper  standing 
in  the  Union.  Whatever  may  be  the  course  of  the  civil 
authorities,  however,  looking  to  that  end,  no  measure 
which  they  may  adopt,  during  the  continuance  of  the  war, 
will  be  effectual,  except  as  backed  up  by  military  force ; 
and  it  may  be  that  while  the  war  continues,  no  effective 
measures  will  be  adopted,  but  such  as  are  embraced 
within  and  may  be  carried  out  by  the  war  power  of  the 
Executive;  and  even  after  the  war  shall  have  ended,  in 
the  complete  success  of  the  Union  arms,  and  the  civil 
authority  shall  have  erected  its  barriers,  we  do  not  antici 
pate  a  ready  acquiescence  on  the  part  of  the  entire  Southern 
people  to  a  parting  with  slavery.  Whatever  status  may 
be  given  to  the  institution  by  the  law, — even  a  prohibition 
of  it  forever,  and  that  by  the  Constitution,  and  a  requisition 
that  similar  prohibitions  shall  be  inserted  in  each  State 
Constitution  in  the  rebel  dominions, — this  may  not  of 
itself,  for  many  years,  be  sufficient.  A  military  force  may 
be  requisite,  in  many  parts  of  the  South,  to  maintain  the 
Constitution  and  the  laws.  But  if  so,  it  will  be  furnished; 
14* 


308  PROVIDENTIAL   DESIGNS    IN    THE    REBELLION. 

even  if  it  require  a  perpetual  standing  army.  If  Southern 
slaveholders  so  elect,  such  will  be  their  condition  ;  they 
will  be  kept  in  order  by  the  troops  of  the  United  States, 
formed  out  of  the  materials  they  have  held  in  bondage, 
just  as  the  Government  is  no\v  employing  such  troops  to 
reduce  them  to  subjection  to  the  Constitution  and  the 
laws.  It  is  among  the  clearest  of  all  propositions,  as 
reasonable,  that  the  people  who  sustain  the  Government 
in  prosecuting  the  war,  who  have  endured  and  are  enduring 
its  untold  sacrifices,  will  shrink  back  from  no  burden  and 
no  measure,  when  the  war  shall  have  ended  in  triumph, 
which  may  be  essential  to  make  good  their  determination 
to  destroy  the  cause  of  the  rebellion,  that  it  may  trouble 
their  children  or  their  children's  children  no  more  forever. 

ACTION    IN    CERTAIN    BORDER    STATES. 

We  have  spoken  thus  far  of  the  termination  of  slavery 
in  the  Rebel  States  only,  and  on  the  supposition  of  the 
complete  suppression  of  the  rebellion  and  restoration  of 
the  national  authority.  The  remaining  slave  States,  with, 
we  believe,  but  one  or  possibly  two  exceptions,  have  recently 
taken  measures  within  themselves  to  terminate  slavery  by 
State  Constitutional  authority.  Maryland  is  now  engaged 
in  altering  her  Constitution  so  as  to  abolish  it  within  that 
State,  and  the  sentiments  of  her  people  are  well  known  to 
favor  the  measure  by  a  large  majority.*  West  Virginia, 
a  new  State  formed  from  Virginia,  has  already  abolished 

*  The  Baltimore  American  of  June  27th,  brings  an  important  annonnoement 
from  the  proceedings  of  the  Constitutional  Convention  of  Maryland.  It  trives  the 
twenty-third  article  of  the  Bill  of  Kights,  as  follows:  "  Hereafter,  in  this  State, 
there  shall  be  neither  slavery  nor  involuntary  servitude,  except  in  pmnshim'nt  of 
crime,  whereof  the  party  shall  be  duly  convicted;  and  all  persons  ht-hJ  lo  .-service 
or  labor  ax  SLAVES,  are  hereby  declared  FKRE."  Upon  this,  the  American  says: 
"This  article,  after  a  protracted  debate  in  the  Constitutional  Convention,  in  the 
course  of  which  it  was  sustained  in  a  masterly  manner  by  the  advocates  of  Anti- 
Slavery,  was  passed  by  a  vote  of  fifty-three  yeus  to  twenty-seven  nays."  This  lacks 


ACTION    IN    CERTAIN    BORDER    STATES.  309 

slavery.  Missouri  has  not  yet  accomplished  that  result, 
but  it  is  well  known  that  the  mass  of  her  people  are  in 
favor  of  it,  the  main  or  only  difference  among  them  being 
whether  it  shall  be  immediate  or  gradual.  There  are  so 
few  slaves  in  Delaware,  and  the  territory  they  occupy  is 
so  small,  that  practically  the  matter  is  of  little  consequence 
in  its  bearings  upon  the  national  question.  We  do  not 
know  whether  any  measures  have  been  taken  since  the 
war  began,  to  remove  slavery  from  that  State ;  but  in  any 
event  it  is  fair  to  conclude,  that  when  slavery  shall  have 
been  removed  from  the  other  Border  States,  and  shall 
have  been  overthrown  in  the  rebel  States,  it  will  not 
long  continue  to  infest  the  soil  of  Little  Delaware.  Ten 
nessee  was  not  embraced  in  the  President's  Proclamation 
declaring  the  freedom  of  the  slaves  in  States  that  had 
rebelled  ;  but  it  is  well  understood  from  the  sentiments 
of  her  leading  loyal  men  of  all  former  political  parties, 
that  the  masses  of  the  people  desire  the  institution  to 
cease  among  them,  and  public  Conventions  of  the  people 
have  so  declared ;  but  in  consequence  of  the  presence  of 
war  within  her  borders,  and  the  disorganization  of  the 

but  on^  vote  of  beinsr  two  to  one.  The  people  will  of  course  ratify  it  by  a  large 
majority,  for  the  Convention,  so  recently  elected,  but  reflects  in  this  act  the 
popular  will.  It  was  upon  this  question  that  the  election  turned.  It  makes  Mary 
land  a  free  State,  by  immediate  emancipation,  and  that  without  compensation. 
"My  Maryland,"  thus  stands  erect.  She  has  the  honor  of  being  the  first  of  the  loyal 
States  which  has  voluntarily  made  "all  men  free1'  within  her  borders.  The  Ameri 
can  further  says  :  "  The  regeneration  of  a  Commonwealth  like  ours  is  not  an  every 
day  occurrence.  It  is  hard  to  estimate  this  work  at  its  full  value.  But  we  shall  see 
and  know  it  better  hereafter.  All  we  know  now  is  that  the  vestiges  of  a  great  evil 
are  cleared  nway;  that  the  canker  of  a  great  iniquity  is  extirpated,  root 
and  branch ;  that  to  our  posterity  no  compromise  is  bequeathed  which  may 
be  a  fruitful  source  of  discord  hereafter.  Eaces  are  forgotten,  and  humanity  is 
honored.  We  have  joined  the  train  of  rejuvenated  States  in  the  march  of  Freedom. 
We  have  torn  aw.-iy  the  mask  from  the  deformity  of  Slavery,  and  we  have  wrenched 
the  rod  from  the-  oppressor.  We  look  to  the  future  with  hearts  full  of  hope  and 
trust,  confident  that  Providence  in  its  own  good  time  will  work  out  for  us  a  brighter 
destiny.  We  offer  our  hand  to  our  sister  States  and  ask  their  congratulations.  We 
ask  them  to  join  us  in  the  prayer,  God  preserve  the  Commonwealth  of  Maryland. 


310  PROVIDENTIAL   DESIGNS    IN    THE    REBELLION. 

civil  authorities  by  the  rebellion,  no  determinate  action 
has  yet  been  taken.  The  District  of  Columbia  has  been 
instantly  changed  from  slave  to  free  territory  by  an  Act 
of  Congress,  since  the  outbreak  of  rebellion  ;  and  by  the 
same  authority  freedom  has  been  secured  to  all  the  Terri 
tories  of  the  United  States. 

Kentucky  is  the  only  remaining  slave  State.  She  has 
taken  no  action  upon  slavery  since  the  rebellion  began. 
This  may  be  owing  to  the  fact  that  such  are  the  provisions 
of  her  Constitution,  that  no  measures  of  a  legislative 
character,  looking  to  its  removal,  even  by  a  gradual  pro 
cess,  could  reach  their  decisive  point,  short  of  some  six  or 
seven  years  from  their  inauguration  by  the  Legislature. 
Many  citizens  of  Kentucky  believe,  and  so  express  them 
selves  freely,  that  long  before  that  period  can  arrive, 
slavery  will  be  terminated  in  that  State  and  throughout 
the  whole  country,  by  the  course  of  events  inevitably 
resulting  from  the  action  of  the  Government  in  putting 
down  the  rebellion. 

SIGNS    OF    ITS    TERMINATION. THE    LOYAL    STATES. 

We  present,  then,  as  the  first  palpable  indication  which 
we  notice,  in  the  course  of  providence,  that  God's  design, 
in  this  rebellion,  is  the  removal  of  slavery  from  the  country 
entirely,  the  events  to  which  we  have  referred. 

The  simultaneous  action  of  the  States  of  so  large  a  ter 
ritory  as  is  embraced  in  the  broad  belt  of  the  Border 
States,  for  the  freedom  of  thousands  of  slaves,  taken  in 
connection  with  the  pervading  sentiment  in  favor  of  the 
removal  of  slavery  in  the  other  loyal  slave  States,  and  the 
actual  removal  of  slavery  from  the  District  of  Columbia, 
and  its  prohibition  in  all  the  Territories  of  the  Union,  are 
events  of  such  importance,  that,  were  they  not  overshad 
owed  by  the  excitements  immediately  attending  the  war, 


FUGITIVE    SLAVE    LAW    REPEALED.  311 

they  would  occupy  a  prominent  place  in  the  public  thought 
of  the  world. 

These  unexpected  and  extraordinary  events  are  the 
direct  result  of  the  rebellion  •  among  the  a  first-fruits" 
which  it  has  immediately  brought  forth.  It  is  difficult  to 
believe  they  could  have  occurred  so  extensively,  and  oc 
curred  within  so  short  a  period,  and  at  the  same  time,  bad 
not  the  rebellion  taken  place.  No  such  change  in  public 
sentiment  could  have  been  brought  about,  within  such  a 
period,  nor  such  action  inaugurated,  by  any  method  of 
mere  discussion,  even  confined  within  the  respective  States. 
And  had  Congress  undertaken,  at  any  time  within  twenty 
years,  to  free  the  slaves  in  the  District  of  Columbia,  or  to 
engraft  upon  every  Territorial  bill  a  prohibition  of  slavery, 
as  it  has  done  within  the  last  three  years,  it  would  have 
convulsed  the  nation  ;  it  would  have  inaugurated  rebellion, 
which  was  in  fact  undertaken  in  the  apprehended  fear  that 
such  measures  might  possibly  occur. 

We  cannot  understand  how  a  believer  in  providence  can 
interpret  events  so  unlikely  to  occur  under  ordinary  cir 
cumstances,  so  palpably  occasioned  by  the  rebellion,  in 
any  other  manner  than  that  God  designs  to  remove  slavery 
from  the  vast  regions  mentioned,  and  that  the  rebellion, — 
in  which  He  makes  the  wrath  of  man  to  praise  Him, — is  the 
agency  through  which  He  aims  to  accomplish  it. 

FUGITIVE    SLAVE    LAW    REPEALED. 

There  is  another  important  fact  in  the  line  of  providence 
and  bearing  directly  upon  the  termination  of  slavery,  a  fact 
which  has  a  special  influence  upon  the  continuance  of 
slavery  in  the  Border  States,  and  which  more  or  less  affects 
it  in  the  whole  slave  portion  of  the  Union.  The  present 
Congress  has  repealed  the  Fugitive  Slave  Law,  both  the 
Act  of  1793  and  th.it  of  1S">0 ;  so  that  now  there  is  no  law 


312  PROVIDENTIAL    DESIGNS    IN   THE    REBELLION. 

of  the  United  States  for  the  reclamation  of  slaves  escaping 
from  their  masters.  The  Canada  line,  in  its  previous 
bearings  upon  slavery,  is  now  the  Ohio  and  the  Potomac. 
Even  if  the  Border  States  had  taken  no  action  for  abolish 
ing  slavery,  the  effect  of  this  repeal  would  soon  be  very 
visible  upon  the  institution  within  them,  as  well  as  upon 
the  whole  slave  region. 

Here  is  another  important  measure,  the  fruit  of  the  re 
bellion.  Congress  could  not,  at  any  period  since  1850, 
and  before  the  rebellion,  have  repealed  the  Fugitive  Slave 
Act  of  that  year,  without  producing  a  revolution.  The 
members  from  the  South  would  very  likely  have  carried  out 
their  oft-repeated  threat,  and  withdrawn  in  a  body  from 
both  Houses.  Those  threats  were  once  thought  to  be  only 
idle  breath,  Southern  bluster ;  but  no  special  credulity  is 
now  required  to  believe  that  they  would  have  been  put  in 
execution. 

SLAVES    FREED    BY    THE    WAR. 

Another  event  disastrous  to  slavery,  and  which  has 
been  occasioned  by  the  rebellion,  is  the  influence  which 
has  resulted  from  a  state  of  war  and  the  presence  of  the 
army.  We  speak  now  particularly  of  the  Border  States. 
With  the  Federal  armies  traversing  those  States,  and  with 
the  usages  of  war  in  former  times,*  and  the  orders  of  the 
War  Department  and  the  decision  of  the  Executive,  and 
the  Acts  of  Congress,  in  revising  the  Articles  of  War,  the 
point  was  early  reached  that  all  slaves  coming  within  the 
lines  of  the  army  should  be  deemed  free,  and  not  returned 
to  thrir  masters. 

Besides  this,  the  action  of  the  Government,  under  Ex- 

*  We  shall  show,  on  a  future  page  in  this  chapter,  that  the  United  States  authorities, 
military  and  civil,  have,  in  former  wars,  recognized  the  freedom  of  slaves  coming 
within  the  lines  of  the  United  States  army. 


ALL  TRACEABLE  TO  THE  REBELLION.        313 

ecutive  authority,  in  enrolling  negroes,  free  and  slave,  as 
soldiers,  and  securing  to-  the  latter  their  freedom  ;  and 
finally,  the  Act  of  Congress  providing  for  their  enrolment 
in  all  the  States,  guarantee-ing  to  the  slaves  their  freedom, 
and  to  loyal  masters  compensation;  these  are  among  the 
measures  which  have  had  a  great  influence  in  rendering 
the  institution  comparatively  worthless,  even  in  the  loyal 
Border  States.  In  Maryland  and  Kentucky,  where  great 
opposition  has  been  made  to  the  Enrolment  Act,  in  hun 
dreds  of  cases  the  slaves  have  not  waited  either  for  the  enrol 
ment  or  draft,  but  have  gone  to  the  camps  and  enlisted, 
and  under  the  orders  and  decisions  of  the  Government 
have  become  thenceforth  free  ;  so  that,  in  every  way,  from 
the  presence  of  the  army,  and  from  a  state  of  war,  the 
institution  of  slavery  in  the  loyal  States,  where  there  was 
no  disposition  on  the  part  of  the  Government  to  interfere 
with  it  in  itself  considered,  has  become  thoroughly  de 
moralized,  almost  wholly  worthless,  and  is  rapidly  melting 
away,  leading  to  the  fueling  entertained  by  a  large  number 
of  those  most  interested  in  the  institution,  that  the  sooner 
it  is  finally  terminated  the  better  it  will  be  for  all  persons 
and  interests  concerned. 

ALL    TRACEABLE    TO    THE    REBELLION. 

Such  are  the  facts  passing  before  our  eyes.  Whatever 
may  be  thought  of  this  course  of  events, — whether  they 
afford  matter  for  rejoicing  or  lamentation, — one  thing  is 
most  clear :  tJiey  are  the  fruits  of  the  rebellion.  If  any 
lament,  they  must  hold  the  rebellion  responsible;  while 
those  who  survey  them  justly,  must  behold  in  them  "a 
Divinity  that  shapes  our  ends,'1  operating  through  the 
"rough-hewn"  aims  and  deeds  of  a  foul  conspiracy. 

We  say  again,  that  we  cannot  understand  how  it  is  that 
any  person  who  holds  to  the  doctrine  of  providence,  that 


314  PROVIDENTIAL    DESIGNS    IN    THE    REBELLION. 

God  works  out  His  purposes  through  the  agency  of  man, — 
the  wicked  and  the  good  alike, — can  note  carefully  and 
candidly  passing  events,  and  not  come  to  the  conclusion 
that  God  designs,  as  one  result  of  the  rebellion  and  the 
war,  the  removal  of  slavery  from  the  land.  Besides  the 
facts  mentioned,  it  is  the  desire,  as  founded  injustice  and 
good  policy,  seen  in  the  opinions  of  leading  men  in  these 
States,  which  we  shall  give  hereafter,  that  slavery  should 
be  removed  ;  and  it  is  likewise  their  belief,  that  "the  ful 
ness  of  time"  for  this  grand  consummation  has  at  length 
come. 

TERMINATION    OF    SLAVERY    IN   THE    REBEL    STATES. 

Many  of  the  same  causes  which  we  have  mentioned, 
operating  to  the  removal  of  slavery  from  the  Border  States, 
have  the  same  effect  upon  the  States  farther  South.  The 
repeal  of  the  Fugitive  Slave  Acts,  the  removal  of  slavery 
from  the  District  of  Columbia,  its  prohibition  in  all  the 
Territories,  affect  all  the  States  alike,  though  not  to  the 
same  extent.  So,  also,  the  action  of  the  Border  States, 
and  the  sentiments  of  many  of  their  leading  men,  in  favor 
of  nbolishing  slavery  therein,  are  not  without  their  moral 
effect  in  the  same  direction  upon  the  other  States. 

Another  sign  of  great  significance  is  the  development 
already  of  antislavery  sentiment  and  action  in  the  remotest 
Gulf  States  and  others,  as  they  have  been  restored  by  the 
Union  arms.  Louisiana  is  revising  her  State  Constitu 
tion,  purging  it  of  slavery,  and  has  already  inaugurated  a 
State  Government  upon  an  antislavery  basis.  Arkansas 
has  done  the  same.  Tennessee  has  taken  steps  in  the  same 
direction,  and  will  soon  stnnd  erect,  organized,  and  purged 
of  slavery.  All  these  States  will  soon  be  fully  represented 
in  Congress ;  possibly  in  the  next  session  of  the  present 
Congress. 


TERMINATION    OF    SLAVERY.  315 

Other  States  will  follow  in  the  same  direction  when  re 
conquered  to  the  Union,  and  when  there  can  be  an  oppor 
tunity  for  the  true  sentiment  of  the  people  to  be  heard. 
Undoubtedly  the  mass  of  them  have  preferred  slavery,  and 
perhaps  would  prefer  it  still  as  a  system  of  labor,  in  itself 
considered,  for  they  have  known  no  other;  but  as  the 
arms  of  the  Union  advance,  and  they  see  that  there  is  no 
hope  of  realizing  their  dreams  of  a  Slave  Empire,  and  as 
they  reflect  on  the  prosperity  they  once  enjoyed  and  the 
woes  with  which  they  are  sin-rounded, — all  brought  upon 
them  by  "  secession"  for  the  security  of  slavery  which  they 
were  assured  would  be  "peaceful" — they  will,  as  they 
love  peace  better  than  war,  and  as  they  prefer  prosperity, 
stability,  certainty,  and  quiet,  to  an  endless  strife  over 
slavery,  submit  to  the  necessities  of  the  case  and  abandon 
their  idol  to  its  fate.  We  look  for  a  rapid  development 
of  this  feeling,  and  for  corresponding  results,  in  North 
Carolina,  Georgia,  and  some  other  States,  whenever  they 
shall  have  been  completely  possessed  by  the  armies  of  the 
Union,  and  the  danger  of  a  repossession  by  the  rebel  forces 
is  past. 

In  large  districts  of  the  South  slavery  will  die  hard. 
Powder  and  shot,  and  shell,  war,  blood,  and  carnage, 
have  been  invoked  for  its  security  and  expansion  ;  these 
are  the  weapons  which  will  work  its  death,  while  the 
victims  of  its  bondage  will  prove  the  sentinels  which  will 
watch  over  its  grave. 

We  may  see  what  the  inarch  of  armies  is  doing  for 
slavery  in  the  daily  events  of  the  war.  Into  every  slave 
State  where  the  Union  forces  move,  the  institution  gives 
way.  Many  are  driven  off  and  huddled  together  in 
regions  farther  South;  thousands  are  enlisted  into  the 
ranks  ;  and  what  remains  of  the  institution  becomes  use 
less  to  masters,  of  no  avail  to  the  country,  and  its  victims 


316  PROVIDENTIAL    DESIGNS    IX    THE    REBELLION. 

look  to  the  hand  of  the  Government  for  their  daily  bread. 
Such  will  be  the  condition  of  things,  substantially,  all 
over  the  South  as  the  country  is  reclaimed. 

When  the  conquest  is  complete,  and  the  war  ended, 
slavery  will  be  terminated  in  every  Rebel  State  by  the 
course  of  measures  already  mentioned.  The  security  for 
this  will  be  the  military  power  of  the  Union,  just  as  long 
as  it  may  be  necessary.  When  the  people  get  tired  of 
this,  and  think  it  best  to  submit  to  the  authority  of  the 
Government,  give  up  their  love  of  slavery,  and  employ 
their  former  slaves  as  free  laborers,  and  treat  them 
properly,  they  can  be  released  from  their  own  bondage ; 
but  until  they  do  this,  the  military  rule  will  undoubtedly 
continue. 

SLAVERY    DOOMED    THOUGH    DISUNION    TRIUMPH. 

We  have  already  said,  in  this  chapter,  that  the  termina 
tion  or  the  perpetuation  of  slavery  is  by  no  means  neces 
sarily  connected  with  the  result  of  the  war  ;  that,  in  any 
event,  we  believed  its  doom  was  sealed.  We  will  now 
explain  what  is  meant  by  this. 

We  have  presented  considerations  thus  far  to  show  that 
providential  designs,  read  in  the  light  of  passing  events, 
point  to  the  termination  of  slavery ;  but  we  have  con 
sidered  these  events  only  as  connected  with  the  complete 
overthrow  of  the  rebellion  and  the  re  establishment  of  the 
national  authority.  That  the  nation  wrill  eventually 
triumph,  we  have  never  doubted;  and  that  with  its 
triumph  by  its  military  power  will  come  the  eternal  doom 
of  slavery,  we  have  as  little  doubt.  We  regard  it  as 
decreed  of  God.  But  whether  our  nationality  shall  perish 
or  survive,  we  view  the  doom  of  slavery  as  written  in  the 
clearest  light ;  and  for  this  we  will  present  what  we  deem 
satisfactory  reasons. 


INTERNAL    CAUSES    OF    ITS    DESTRUCTION.  31*7 


INTERNAL    CAUSES"  OP    ITS    DESTRUCTION. 

The  main  one,  and  which  is  the  germ  of  all,  is,  that  the 
rebellion  has  completely  demoralized  the  institution 
throughout  the  whole  slave  region.  So  thoroughly  has 
this  been  done,  and  will  it  be  done  by  the  further  prose 
cution  of  the  war,  that  it  will  be  impossible  to  restore  it 
to  its  former  condition,  so  as  to  be  safe  and  profitable  as 
before,  by  all  the  power  which  the  "  Confederate  States," 
if  established  and  recognized,  can  muster  for  that  object. 

That  an  exertion  of  power  for  that  end,  not  requisite 
hitherto,  would  be  demanded  in  the  case  supposed,  is  too 
plain  for  doubt.  The  slaves  can  never  again  be  made 
contented  with  their  condition  in  bondage.  It  is  idle  to 
tell  us  that  they  have  been  entirely  contented  with  that 
condition  hitherto.  Having  lived  more  than  fifteen  years 
of  our  professional  life  in  two  of  the  Gulf  States,  and 
travelled  extensively  over  several  others  in  the  extreme 
South  ;  having  seen  the  system  in  city  and  country,  at 
work  and  in  recreation,  upon  the  plantation  and  in  the 
household,  in  the  cabin  and  in  the  church,  at  home  and 
abroad — we  know  something  of  its  character  and  work 
ings,  and  have  very  little  that  is  new  about  it  to  learn. 
The  stringent  police  system  universal  in  the  South,  and  a 
thousand  facts  and  aspects  of  the  case  with  which  we 
will  not  weary  the  reader,  but  which  are  well  understood 
by  all  who  have  lived  where  slavery  prevails,  especially 
in  the  Rebel  States,  establish  the  certainty  that  far  more 
discontent  has  always  existed — creating  an  anxiety  often 
ill-concealed — than  slave-owners  were  generally  willing  to 
admit. 

But,  passing  the  former  discontent  and  its  immediate 
occasion  by,  the  case  is  now  materially  changed.  The 
influence  of  the  rebellion  has  invaded  every  plantation  of 


318  PROVIDENTIAL    DESIGNS    IX    THE    REBELLION. 

the  rebel  dominions.  All  the  slaves  believe  that  the  war 
is  waged  for  the  continuance  of  their  bondage  on  the  one 
hand,  and  for  their  freedom  on  the  other.  That  they 
desire  the  latter  condition  is  unquestionable.  However 
liitle  they  may  have  desired  it  hitherto,  that  desire  is  now 
universal.  Witness  the  multitudes  that  have  flocked  to 
the  Union  armies  as  far  as  they  have  penetrated  slave 
territory,  men,  women,  and  children.  They  no  doubt 
have  very  crude  and  erroneous  notions  of  freedom ;  in 
thousands  of  instances  they  will  find  their  lot  a  hard  one, 
on  gaining  their  liberty,  owing  to  the  distracted  state  of 
the  country;  in  thousands  of  cases  more,  owing  to  the 
same  cause,  have  they  died  of  disease  and  neglect,  and 
many  will  die  hereafter;  and,  undoubtedly,  arising  from 
these  hardships,  will  many  sigh  for  their  former  homes, 
and  some  perhaps,  if  possible,  may  return  to  them  ;  but, 
after  all,  it  is  still  true,  that  the  desire  for  this  new  con 
dition  is  universal,  and  that  it  prompts  them  to  action  to 
gain  it,  and  try  the  experiment  as  soon  as  an  opportunity 
is  given  by  the  presence  of  a  coat  of  blue. 

ILLUSTRATIVE    INCIDENT. COLONEL    DAHLGREN. 

A  fact  sustaining  this  view,  confirmed  by  a  thousand 
instances,  is  well  known.  It  is  the  universal  testimony 
from  our  armies,  that  the  slaves  give  true  information  of 
the  country  and  of  the  enemy,  and  often  at  the  greatest 
risk  of  life,  while  it  is  a  rare  thing  for  the  whites  to  do 
this.  In  all  our  reading  about  the  rebellion,  we  can  call 
to  mind  but  one  instance  to  the  contrary  ;  that  in  which 
the  slave  of  Mr.  Seddon,  the  rebel  Secretary  of  War,  mis 
led  a  portion  of  the  forces  of  the  lamented  Colonel  DaJil- 
gren,  on  his  approach  to  Richmond.  Some  have  doubted 
the  deception  practised  in  this  case ;  but,  if  true,  it  is  the 
exception  which  confirms  the  rule. 


FACTS,    AND   THEIR   LESSON.  319 

FACTS,    AND    THEIE    LESSON. 

Two  facts  are  sometimes  mentioned,  one  of  a  negative 
and  the  other  of  a  positive  character,  to  confront  the  view 
we  have  given.  We  admit  them  both,  but  deny  the  con 
clusion  drawn  from  them.  It  is  said,  if  the  slaves  are  so 
desirous  of  freedom,  why  have  they  not  shown  it  by 
rising  upon  their  masters  universally?  Many  supposed 
this  would  be  the  case  on  the  issuing  of  the  President's 
Proclamation  of  Freedom,  1st  of  January,  1863.  We 
were  not  of  the  number.  Our  acquaintance  with  the 
South  led  to  a  different  opinion,  and  the  result  has  verified 
its  correctness. 

That  the  Proclamation  is  known  and  understood  by 
them  as  extensively  as  any  other  specific  and  important 
measure  of  the  Government  we  do  not  doubt.  But  three 
causes,  to  name  no  more,  are  sufficient  to  prevent,  at  the 
present  time,  a  wide  insurrection  for  gaining  their  free 
dom.  The  first  is,  their  powerlessness,  while  the  whole 
Southern  country  is  armed,  and  they  are  guarded  by  a 
more  strict  police  than  ever.  With  all  their  ignorance, 
they  know  such  attempt  to  be  hopeless,  and  that  it  would 
end  in  their  indiscriminate  slaughter.*  The  second  is, 
that  they  would  have  first  to  conquer  and  destroy  the 
women  and  children  upon  the  plantations,  in  addition  to 
the  police,  to  prevent  their  giving  information,  and  to  dis 
possess  them  of  the  arms  which  many  of  them  have. 
This  would  operate  as  a  restraint  upon  many,  even  though 
they  saw  freedom  before  them  ;  for,  whatever  else  may 
be  said,  a  very  strong  attachment  exists,  very  extensively, 
between  them  and  the  personnel  of  the  household.  But 

*  The  testimony  that  a  universal  slaughter  would  result  from  insurrection,  is 
given  in  the  "Address  to  the  Christian  World,"  by  ninety- six  Southern  clergymen 
of  all  denominations,  quoted  on  page  183,  in  Chapter  v. 


320         PROVIDEJSTIAL   DESIGN'S    IN   THE    REBELLION. 

the  third  cause  is  sufficiently  powerful  to  overcome  the 
temptation  which  might  impel  them  to  violence.  They 
believe  the  day  of  their  deliverance  is  near,  and  that  they 
have  only  to  wait  in  order  to  realize  it.  They  believe 
that  their  freedom  will  be  secured  by  the  Union  armies, 
id  the  suppression  of  the  rebellion,  and  that  they  must 
wait  for  their  coming.  That  their  Day  of  Jubilee  is  at 
hand,  is  with  them  a  conviction  as  strong  as  death. 

The  other  fact  relied  on  to  show  that  they  are  con 
tented  with  their  lot,  and  not  desirous  of  freedom,  is  the 
alacrity  they  display  in  serving  their  masters  in  the  camp, 
and  in  other  positions  connected  with  the  rebel  service. 
This  is  easily  explained.  They  are  entirely  under  military 
control,  and  infinitely  more  in  the  army  than  on  the 
plantations,  although  few  of  them  have  been  placed  in 
the  rebel  ranks.  Their  lot  is  to  obey,  or- forfeit  life. 


WAR    EDUCATING    SLAVES    FOR    FREEDOM. 

Another  important  consideration,  bearing  on  the  de 
struction  of  slavery,  even  though  the  Confederacy  should 
at  length  be  established,  is  the  education  which  the  rebel 
lion,  more  or  less  extensively,  is  diffusing  among  the 
slaves.  It  is  making  them  acquainted  with  war;  giving 
many  of  them  habits  of  military  discipline,  and  an  acquaint 
ance  with  many  important  details  of  the  military  art.  We 
have  already  stated,  what  is  well  supported  by  the  facts, 
that  the  reason  why  so  few  comparatively  of  the  slaves 
are  put  into  the  rebel  armies,  is  owing  to  the  fear  of  the 
consequences  which  would  result  from  making  them 
soldiers.  But  enough  has  been  done  to  make  the  experi 
ment  dangerous,  should  peace  result  and  leave  them  in 
bondage.  This  leaven  would  be  diffused,  and  the  knowl 
edge  improved  and  extended. 


EXTERNAL    CAUSES    OF    ITS    DESTRUCTION.  321 

We  have  no  manner  of  doubt,  that,  if  the  rebellion 
should  triumph,  and  its  leaders  should  determine  to  realize 
their  idea  of  building  a  great  Empire  on  the  "  corner- 
sione"  of  slavery, — securing  its  perpetuity,  extension,  and 
stability  against  all  dangers, — the  slaves,  seeing  that  their 
longings  and  hopes  were  about  being  destroyed,  would 
become  even  more  demoralized  than  now,  so  far  as  em 
ployment  is  concerned,  and  would  then  rise  and  assert  their 
freedom  to  the  extent  of  their  power,  even  though  they 
should  deem  the  issue  doubtful  and  destruction  probable. 
We  might  then  look  for  a  repetition  of  the  scenes  of  St. 
Domingo,  a  servile  war  with  terrible  atrocities,  and  for 
the  negroes,  possibly,  at  the  end — freedom;  but  certainly 
not  a  continuance  of  negro  slavery,  in  a  great  Empire  of 
the  Gulf,  of  which  that  element  should  be  the  "  corner 
stone." 

EXTERNAL    CAUSES    OF    ITS    DESTRUCTION. 

We  have  only  considered  the  causes  which  would  ope 
rate  within  the  Confederacy  for  the  destruction  of  slavery, 
in  case  its  independence  were  acknowledged.  There  are 
powerful  causes  which  would  operate  outside  of  it  for  the 
same  end. 

In  no  treaty  which  could  possibly  be  made  with  the  United 
States  would  any  immunity  be  granted  to  slavery.  No 
Fugitive  Slave  Law  will  ever  again  ornament  the  Statutes 
at  L.-ii'ge  of  the  Union ;  nor  would  any  other  concession 
to  the  system  be  made.  The  party  that  should  attempt  it 
>vould  be  hurled  from  power  and  doomed  to  infamy.  The 
Administration  that  should  propose  or  agree  to  it  would 
provoke  a  revolution.  The  people  have  had  that  chalice 
pressed  to  their  lips  for  the  last  time.  They  have  drunk 
it  in  blood,  the  blood  of  their  sons  and  brothers.  They 
will  drink  of  it  no  more  forever. 


322  PROVIDENTIAL    DESIGNS    IN    THE    REBELLION. 

Without  such  guarantees,  how  long  could  slavery  exist 
in  a  Southern  Confederacy  ?  The  line  between  freed*. in 
and  slavery  would  steadily  inarch  South,  first  placing  the 
Border  States  behind  it,  then  the  next  tier,  and  so  on  steadily, 
by  the  escape  of  slaves  ;  until  the  States,  from  the  paucity 
of  labor,  and  in  sheer  self-defence,  would  adopt  the  free- 
labor  system  in  order  to  maintain  the  cultivation  of  the  soil. 

Besides  this,  every  possible  effort  would  be  made  by 
those  in  the  old  Union  who  are  violently  opposed  to 
slavery,  to  interfere  with  it;  by  publications,  by  under 
ground  railroads,  by  John  Brown  raids,  and  by  any  and 
every  other  means  within  their  power.  Nor  would  they 
be  at  all  restrained,  but  rather  stimulated  to  this,  by  what 
they  have  already  sacrificed  in  a  war  for  which  slavery  is 
responsible ;  and  should  an  insurrection  occur  in  the  South, 
it  vould  be  aided  freely.  Nor  could  any  legislation  pre 
vent  such  course  of  action,  should  it  be  attempted.  We 
say  nothing  of  the  propriety  of  any  of  these  measures,  but 
only  speak  of  what  would  inevitably  occnr,  taking  human 
nature  as  it  is.  How  long,  under  this  state  of  things,  could 
slavery  endure? 

ENVIRONED    BY    ENEMIES. 

But  this  is  not  all.     Such  a  nation  would  brin^  down 

£3 

upon  it  the  wrath  of  the  world.  It  has  been  about  as  much 
as  the  United  States  could  bear  with  a  good  grace,  to  with 
stand  the  odium  of  universal  Christendom,  with  a  portion 
of  its  territory  burdened  with  slavery  merely  under  tole 
ration  ;  but  when  a  nation  should  have  consummated  the 
consecration  of  that  system  as  its  "  corner-stone,"  through 
a  ceremonial  of  treason,  blood,  and  carnage,  and  should 
attempt  to  carry  out  its  new  Gospel  to  the  results  designed 
by  its  founders,  it  would  become  insufferable  among  men ; 
and  should  it  open  the  African  slave-trade  to  replenish  its 


COTTON   DKEAMS    VANISHED.  ;)23 

fields  with  laborers,  as  was  a  part  of  the  original  plan  of  its 
leaders,  it  would  be  dealt"  with  as  a  pirate  among  the  na 
tions,  just  as  individuals  are  now  treated  who  engage  in 
that  execrable  traffic. 

It  is  not  easy  to  perceive  how  the  "  Confederate  States 
of  America,"  thus  beset  by  millions  of  enemies  within, 
each  feeling  that  he  is  personally  wronged  in  the  depriva 
tion  of  his  manhood,  and  beset  by  enemies  of  such  power 
and  number  in  the  nations  of  the  world  without,  each  feel 
ing  that  it  had  a  duty  to  discharge  toward  the  oppressed 
and  in  behalf  of  humanity,  could  long  rest  securely  on  its 
favorite  "  corner-stone."  The  stone  would  crumble  under 
such  blows,  and  the  whole  edifice  would  fall  and  perish. 

COTTON    DKEAMS    VANISHED. 

It  is  quite  too  late  in  the  day  to  affirm  that  such  a  nation 
would  be  countenanced  by  other  nations  from  necessity  • 
and  to  admit,  with  Dr.  Palmer,  that  to  "  conserve  and 
perpetuate  slavery"  was  a  duty  they  owed  "to  the  civilized 
world,"  even  though  it  be  true  that  "  the  blooms  upon 
Southern  fields,  gathered  by  black  hands,  have  fed  the 
spindles  and  looms  of  Manchester  and  Birmingham  not  less 
than  of  Lawrence  and  Lowell."  All  such  dreams  are  of 
the  past,  so  far  as  they  relate  to  slavery  •  for  nothing  is 
more  certain  than  that  those  "  blooms"  can  equally  well 
be  "  gathered  by  black  hands"  that  fire  free.  Nor  is  it  at 
all  needful  that  those  "hands"  should  be  "black;"  much  less 
that  "  the  blooms"  they  gather  should  be  from  "  Southern 
fields"  alone.  The  necessities  growing  out  of  this  rebel 
lion  have  demonstrated  that  the  throne  of  King  Cotton  is 
not  immovably  built  on  Southern  plantations,  and  that 
his  dally  attendants  may  be  found  among  other  people 
than  the  dark-hued  sons  of  Africa.  The  mills  of  Manches 
ter  and  Birmingham  have  already  learned  this  practical 
15  " 


324          PROVIDENTIAL   DESIGNS    IN   THE    REBELLION. 

lesson,  and  those  of  Lowell  and  Lawrence  are  quite  as 
apt  scholars. 

The  dream  of  Dr.  Palmer,  however,  is  none  other  than 
that  which  filled  the  watches  of  the  night  and  the 
hours  of  the  day  of  all  the  Southern  leaders.  "  Strike 
a  blow,"  says  he,  "  at  this  system  of  labor,  and  the  world 
itself  totters  at  the  stroke."  And  with  a  patriotism  which 
is  quite  cosmopolitan,  he  exclaims  :  "  Shall  we  permit  that 
blow  to  fall  ?  Do  we  not  owe  it  to  civilized  'man  to  stand 
in  the  breach  and  stay  the  uplifted  arm  ?  If  the  blind 
Samson  lays  hold  of  the  pillars  which  support  the  arch  of  the 
world's  industry,  how  many  more  will  be  buried  beneath 
its  ruins  than  the  lords  of  the  Philistines  ?"  And  with  a 
complacency  which  is  quite  edifying,  he  applies  the  words 
addressed  to  Queen  Esther,  to  the  people  of  the  South, 
with  only  this  difference,  that  while  she  was  merely  desired 
to  prefer  a  simple  *'  request"  to  save  the  Jews  from  appre 
hended  evil,  they  are  exhorted  to  treason  and  rebellion  to 
save  uthe  world  itself"  from  absolute  "ruin:"  "Who 
knoweth  whether  we  are  not  come  to  the  kingdom  for 
such  a  time  as  this  ?" 

But  we  presume  that  if  the  world  were  really  driven 
to  the  extremity,  as  it  existed  several  thousand  years 
before  the  discovery  of  the  cotton-gin,  it  probably  could 
continue  awhile  longer  if  the  cotton-plant  should  be  com 
pletely  exterminated ;  though  we  have  no  fear  that  such 
a  catastrophe  will  occur,  or  any  opinion  that  the  world 
would  be  much  the  loser,  if  the  "  Confederate  States"  and 
all  they  contain  should  be  blotted  from  its  map  forever. 

SLAVERY    DOOMED   AND    THE    UNION    MAINTAINED. 

But  the  doom  of  slavery  is  not  dependent,  as  we  believe 
and  have  said,  on  either  result  of  the  war.  No  result  of 
the  bloody  issue  joined  iii  its  favor  can  save  it.  In  a 


SLAVERY   DOOMED   AND  THE    UNION   MAINTAINED.    325 

separate  nation  it  perishes  under  its  own  weight.  With 
our  nationality  maintained,  it  dies  by  the  same  blow  which 
brings  the  rebellion  to  the  block. 

As  we  have  said,  however,  we  do  not  doubt  the  alterna 
tive  to  which  God's  providence  points,  and  which  His 
decree  has  made  sure.  It  is,  in  our  judgment,  "fore 
ordained," — and  we  say  it  with  no  other  light  than  that 
which  is  vouchsafed  to  others,  but  we  think  every  availa 
ble  consideration  warrants  the  position, — that  this  nation 
is  to  stand,  that  its  enemies  are  to  be  overthrown,  that 
the  rebellion  is  to  be  crushed,  and  the  "  Confederate 
States  of  America"  blotted  out;  and  just  as  surely  as  that 
is  done,  the  same  decree  of  God,  executed  by  the  Ameri 
can  people,  will  terminate  negro  slavery  in  this  laud. 
This,  at  least,  is  our  opinion. 

If  any  persons  hesitate  to  accept  these  conclusions,  we 
can  only  ask  them  to  defer  their  opinion  until  the  case  is 
decided.  This  is  safe.  They  might  tell  us  to  do  the  same. 
We  are  quite  willing  to  wait ;  but  we  will,  as  briefly  as 
may  be,  give  "  a  reason  for  the  hope  that  is  in  us,"  and 
we  trust  not  without  "  meekness  and  fear." 

Under  God,  it  is  a  question  of  means,  and  a  question  of 
endurance.  There  is  a  sense  in  which  the  remark  of  the 
great  Napoleon  is  true,  that  "  the  providence  of  God  is 
with  the  strongest  battalions,"  and  there  is  a  sense  in 
which  it  is  false.  We  accept  the  true  sense,  and  apply  it 
to  the  present  case.  Another  remark  we  accept,  that 
uthe  age  of  miracles  is  past,"  and  we  apply  it  now  to  war. 
And  yet,  we  hold  rigidly  to  the  true  doctrine  of  provi 
dence,  that  God  works  in,  through,  by,  and  controls,  all 
that  takes  place,  educing  evil  out  of  good,  and  exalting 
His  great  name.  While  the  Omnipotent  and  the  Omni 
scient  thus  works  out  His  purposes  through  means,  there 
is  generally  an  adaptedness  of  the  means  to  the  end,  an 


326  PROVIDENTIAL   DESIGNS    IN   THE    REBELLION. 

adaptedness  which  a  close  observer  can  often  perceive, 
and  the  course  of  which  he  can  often  trace  with  clearness 
and  declare  the  result. 

Now,  apply  these  general  principles  to  the  case  in  hand, 
and  we  say  that  the  issue  of  this  war  between  lawful  Gov 
ernment  and  a  foul  rebellion  is  merely  or  mainly  a  question 
as  to  which  of  the  parties  can  hold  out  the  longest.  We 
take  it  for  granted,  at  the  outset,  that  neither  intends  to 
compromise  the  question  which  underlies  the  whole  con 
test,  the  question  of  nationality.  The  Government  will 
not  surrender  its  authority  of  rule  over  the  whole  Union, 
but  upon  one  condition, — that  it  is  compelled  to  this  by 
the  total  defeat  of  its  armies.  No  party  or  administration 
would  dare  do  this.  T/ie  people  will  not  allow  it.  It  is  the 
people's  Government,  and  the  people  are  carrying  on  the 
war  to  sustain  it.  On  the  other  hand,  we  have  no  idea 
that  the  leaders  of  the  rebellion  will  ever  give  up  the  con 
test,  except  upon  one  of  two  conditions, — that  their  inde 
pendence  as  a  nation  is  recognized ;  or,  that  the  rebellion 
itself  is  crushed,  which  means  the  destruction  of  its  mili 
tary  power.  Such  being  the  case,  the  war  must  go  on 
until  one  party  or  the  other  is  completely  overthrown.  It 
is  then  a  question  of  endurance,  a  question  of  means  and 
of  power.  This,  upon  the  ground  we  have  assumed,  is  the 
sole  issue. 

REASONS   FOR   THIS   POSITION. 

What,  then,  is  the  relative  strength  of  the  parties?  In 
answering  this,  we  cannot  go  into  a  full  examination,  but 
will  present  some  general  considerations  which  are  funda 
mental,  and  which  substantially  embrace  the  whole  case. 

With  the  rebels,  the  issue,  leaving  out  other  resources, 
is  chiefly  one  of  men,  and  that  in  comparison  with  men  on 
the  other  side.  That  the  rebels  can  "get  along,"  and 


STRENGTH    OF   THE    PARTIES    IN   SOLDIERS.  327 

fight  long  and  vigorously  without  money, — or  rather,  with 
that  only  which  is  worthless,  except  to  themselves,  and 
which  may  become  well  nigh  or  totally  so,  even  to  them, 
— is  unquestionable.  Nations  have  frequently  done  this. 
England  has  prosecuted  her  gigantic  wars,  during  a  long- 
period,  with  her  currency  at  a  very  low  ebb ;  and  France 
has  fought  just  as  vigorously  with  her  assiynats  down  at 
zero  at  the  stock-boards  of  other  nations,  and  worthless, 
for  the  time,  upon  the  Bourse  of  Paris.  The  Confederate 
"  nation"  may  also  fight  on,  with  a  worthless  currency,  or 
with  none  at  all;  and  for  a  circulating  medium,  or  with 
out  one,  the  people  can  come  back  to  barter.  As  for  their 
bogus  Government,  it  can  get  its  necessities  for  the  army, 
by  "  taxation  in  kind,"  and  by  arbitrary  "  impressment," 
phrases  which  have  a  place  in  rebel  "law,"  and  which 
with  the  people  have  a  meaning.  Those  necessities  which 
they  must  have  from  abroad,  they  gain  by  their  cotton 
which  runs  the  blockade ;  and  as  they  have  obtained  sup 
plies  hitherto,  we  admit,  for  the  sake  of  the  argument, 
that  they  may  gain  in  that  way  what  they  may  need  here 
after.  We  therefore  leave  all  this  out  of  the  account,  and 
come  back  to  the  simple  element  of  men  out  of  whom 
to  make  soldiers  /  and  how  stands  the  account  on  this 
score  ? 

STRENGTH    OF   THE    PARTIES    IN   SOLDIERS. 

The  census  of  1860  answers  the  question.  The  eleven 
Confederate  States,  including  Tennessee  and  Arkansas, 
and  excluding  Missouri,  contained,  by  that  census,  one 
million  and  a  quarter  of  white  males  between  fifteen  and 
fifty.  The  remaining  States  contained  something  over  Jive 
millions  of  white  males  between  fifteen  and  fifty.  The  total 
white  population  of  these  respective  portions  of  the  country, 
was,  in  the  former,  five  millions  and  a  half,  and  in  the  lat- 


328         PROVIDENTIAL   DESIGNS   IN   THE    EEBELLION. 

ter,  twenty-one  millions.  N"o  account  is  here  taken  of 
the  large  districts  in  these  eleven  States  which  are  within 
the  lines  of  our  armies,  and  from  which  the  rebel  armies 
cannot  be  recruited ;  as,  for  example,  the  whole  of  Ten 
nessee,  a  large  portion  of  Arkansas,  large  portions  of  Vir 
ginia,  Mississippi,  Louisiana,  and  indeed  a  part  of  each 
one  of  the  eleven.  In  the  comparison,  we  give  the  totals 
of  each  section,  as  shown  by  the  census,  thus  allowing  a 
great  advantage  to  the  rebels.  Admitting  that  three- 
fourths  of  the  number  between  fifteen  and  fifty  years  of 
age, — whether  it  be  too  great  or  too  small,  probably  the 
former,  is  of  no  consequence  in  the  comparison, — are 
physically  qualified  for  the  army,  there  are  about  nine 
hundred  thousand  men  out  of  whom  to  make  soldiers  in 
the  eleven  rebel  States,  and  thirty-seven  hundred  thousand 
in  the  remaining  States.  This  was  about  the  proportion 
of  fighting  men  within  the  range  of  the  parties  at  the 
beginning  of  the  rebellion. 

How  does  the  case  as  to  men  stand  now,  in  the  fourth 
year  of  the  war  ?  It  is  probable  that  the  losses  on  each 
side  have  not  much  changed  the  proportion,  if  any.  If  it 
be  said  that  the  Union  armies  have  lost  more  in  killed, 
as  the  rebels  have  generally  acted  on  the  defensive,  this  is 
fully  or  more  than  compensated  by  the  fact  that  we  have, 
by  many  thousands,  a  large  excess  of  prisoners  ;  and  also 
from  the  consideration  that  our  well-organized  Sanitary 
and  Christian  Commissions,  and  the  abundant  supply  of 
every  thing  requisite  in  the  Medical  Department  of  the 
Union  army,  have  contributed  to  the  recovery  of  a  larger 
proportion  of  our  wounded  than  theirs,  as  the  records  from 
the  battle-field  and  the  hospital,  and  our  knowledge  of  their 
lack  of  medical  supplies,  fully  confirm.  Upon  the  estimate, 
then,  made  largely  from  ofiicial  data,  that  there  have  been 
killed  and  disabled,  in  the  Federal  armies,  half  a  million. 


NEGRO    SOLDIERS. — THEIE   NUMBER   UNLIMITED.      329 

and  upon  the  supposition  that  the  rebels  have  lost  the 
same  number,  the  latter  have  now  left  for  military  service 
but  four  hundred  thousand  white  men,  while  the  Govern 
ment  of  the  Union  has  thirty-two  hundred  thousand  white 
men,  from  whom  to  recruit  their  armies. 

NEGRO    SOLDIERS — THEIR   NUMBER   UNLIMITED. 

The  foregoing  calculation  relates  only  to  the  material 
for  white  soldiers.  President  Lincoln  states  in  his  letter 
to  Colonel  Hodges,  of  Frankfort,  Kentucky,  under  date  of 
April  4,  1864,  that  there  were  then  in  the  Federal  service 
"  quite  a  hundred  and  thirty  thousand  soldiers,  seamen, 
and  laborers,"  of  African  descent.  What  proportion  of 
this  number  carry  a  musket  we  do  not  know ;  but  from  an 
official  report  made  by  Adjutant-General  Thomas,  on  his 
return  from  Mississippi  in  the  summer  of  3863,  and  from 
the  rapid  recruiting  of  negroes  since,  it  is  safe  to  say  that 
there  are  now  hi  the  ranks  of  the  Union  armies  as  fighting 
men,  at  least  one  hundred  thousand  of  this  description. 

But  be  this  estimate  about  negro  soldiers  as  it  may,  the 
facts  upon  this  branch  of  the  subject,  present  and  prospec-* 
tive,  are  momentous  as  regards  this  question  of  the  mili 
tary  strength  of  the  respective  parties.  The  rebels  dare 
not,  to  any  large  extent,  make  soldiers  of  their  slaves ; 
while,  into  every  rebel  State  where  our  armies  penetrate, 
the  recruiting  office  is  opened,  and  thousands  are  soon  en 
rolled  and  drilled  to  fight  for  the  Union  cause ;  and  that 
negroos  will  fight  bravely,  and  when  they  have  had  suffi 
cient  discipline  will  fight  as  well  as  white  men,  is  too  well 
attested  by  official  reports  from  the  highest  commanders 
in  our  armies,  for  any  persons  who  fully  examine  the  case 
to  doubt. 

It  is  true  that  a  large  number  of  white  men  are  required 
at  the  North  to  do  the  work  of  agriculture,  which  in  the 


330          PROVIDENTIAL    DESIGNS    IX   THE    REBELLION. 

South  is  done  by  slaves.  But  so  far  as  this  affects  the  rel 
ative  strength  of  the  material  for  soldiers  of  the  two  sec 
tions,  it  is  far  more  than  counterbalanced  by  the  vastly 
larger  total  number  of  white  men  at  the  North  than  at  the 
South,  and  by  the  fact  just  mentioned,  that,  while  the 
Union  armies  can  be  indefinitely  recruited,  and  are  daily 
being  enhanced  by  that  very  laboring  population  of  the 
South, — the  slaves, — the  rebels  dare  not,  except  to  a  very 
limited  extent,  put  their  slaves  into  the  ranks  of  their 
armies.  The  proof  of  this  is  sufficiently  seen  in  the  discus 
sions  which,  from  time  to  time,  have  taken  place  in  the  Rebel 
Congress  on  this  very  question. 

WHITE    SOLDIERS    SUFFICIENT. 

Taking,  then,  the  facts  of  the  past,  based  upon  the  ma 
terial  of  white  men  for  the  war,  and  from  them  drawing 
the  military  horoscope  of  the  future,  and  the  case  is  unde 
niable, — leaving  out  of  view  negro  soldiers  altogether, — 
that  the  loyal  States  can  stand  the  brunt  of  battle  much 
longer  than  the  States  in  rebellion;  and  as  the  rebels  now 
nave,  from  the  estimates  given,  but/bwr  hundred  thousand 
white  men,  all  told,  fit  for  military  service,  while  the 
United  States  now  have,  of  the  same  description,  thirty- 
two  hundred  thousand,  the  war,  at  the  rate  of  loss  of  life 
thus  far,  need  not  continue  as  long  as  it  has  been  raging 
in  order  to  bury  or  disable  every  rebel  capable  of  bearing 
arms;  while  the  loyal  section  would  still  be  left  with 
twenty-eight  hundred  thousand  men,  or  nearly  three  mil 
lions,  fit  for  military  service,  with  imilHons  more  growing 
up  at  home,  and  tens  of  thousands  annually  corning  in  from 
Europe  of  whom  we  have  taken  noacconnt,  to  attend  to  any 
of  the  little  details  concerning  such  questions  as  the  "  Monroe 
Doctrine"  and  Maximilian,  or  other  minor  matters  which 
the  emergencies  of  the  future  may  present. 


NATIONAL   RESOURCES   AND    CREDIT.  331 

NATIONAL    RESOURCES    AND   CREDIT. 

There  is  one  element  which  we  have  not  adverted  to  on 
the  side  of  the  United  States,  which  is  regarded  as  the 
"  sinews  of  war."  Many  are  appalled  at  the  debt  we  are 
accumulating.  A  recent  official  statement  from  the  Secre 
tary  of  the  Treasury,  makes  the  debt  at  the  end  of  three 
years  of  war,  to  be  seventeen  hundred  and  nineteen  mil 
lions.  Admit  that  it  will  be  doubled  in  three  years  more, 
or  in  round  numbers  will  amount  to  thirty-five  hundred 
millions,  before  which  it  will  be  seen  the  war  must  end, 
from  the  loss  of  rebel  life,  and  still  it  will  by  no  means 
equal  the  debt  which  Great  Britain  had  contracted  by  her 
\vars  fifty  years  ago ;.  and  yet,  Great  Britain  then  had,  as 
a  means  of  revenue  for  a  taxable  basis,  less  than  half  the 
population  that  the  United  States  now  have,  and  her  other 
resources  then  as  compared  with  ours  now  were  far  below 
them.  With  all  this  burden,  Great  Britain  has  been 
steadily  advancing  in  greatness,  power,  and  prosperity,  as 
a  nation,  and  to-day  stands  in  the  front  rank  of  European 
Powers.  The  national  credit  of  the  United  States, — based 
upon  our  unbounded  resources,  to  a  large  extent  yet  unde 
veloped,  resources  within  ourselves  with  which  no  nation 
of  Western  Europe  can  compare, — may  have  a  great  pres 
sure  upon  it,  but  it  will  be  found  able  to  endure  it.  That 
we  have  been  able  to  endure  three  years  of  such  expendi 
tures,  and  have  kept  up  our  credit  to  the  point  which  has 
been  maintained,  without  going  to  Europe  to  borrow 
money,  has  astonished  the  financiers  of  the  Old  World. 

The  people  will  have  pecuniary  burdens  without  doubt, 
and  so  will  our  children  ;  but  when  it  is  a  contest  for 
national  life, — a  contest  for  law,  order,  popular  govern 
ment,  freedom,  and  humanity,  against  treason,  rebellion, 
anarchy,  slavery,  and  eternal  war, — that  man  has  a  soul 
15* 


332          PROVIDENTIAL   DESIGNS    IN   THE    REBELLION. 

that  is  craven,  or  is  in  sympathy  with  rebellion,  or  beset 
with  childish  fears,  or  is  ignorant  of  the  issues  at  stake, 
who  is  croaking  about  pecuniary  burdens.  While  our 
fathers,  sons,  and  brothers,  are  pouring  out  their  hearts' 
blood,  it  is  but  a  poor  sacrifice  we  make  to  sustain  the 
Government  in  whose  cause  they  are  engaged — with  our 
money. 

THE   RESULT. 

We  repeat,  then,  that  we  have  confidence  that  the  Union 
cause  will  triumph,  and  that  the  rebellion  will  be  crushed ; 
not  merely  because  we  have  greater  resources  and  power, 
but  that  God  in  His  providence  will  operate  through  them 
to  maintain  the  right  and  overthrow  the  wrong.  In  that 
overthrow,  slavery,  which  is  at  the  bottom  of  the  strife, 
will  perish  forever  from  this  land.  The  guns  opened  upon 
Fort  Surnter,  in  April,  1861,  sounded  its  death-knell;  and 
not  many  more  April  suns  wTill  rise  and  set  before  patriot 
soldiers  will  exultingly  discharge  their  trusty  rifles  over 
its  grave.  Such  we  believe  to  be  the  firm  determination 
of  the  AMERICAN  PEOPLE,  led  and  sustained  in  the  great 
and  good  work  by  the  PROVIDENCE  OF  GOD. 

GOVERNMENTAL    DETERMINATION    CONFRONTED. 

But  at  this  point  we  are  confronted.  Rebel  leaders, 
among  politicians  and  divines,  boldly  declare  that  the 
Government  in  its  present  purposes  against  slavery,  and 
the  Northern  people  in  sustaining  it,  are  sinning  with  a 
high  hand  ;  not  only  sinning  against  their  rights  as  a 
people,  but  directly  sinning  against  "  the  word,  providence, 
and  government  of  God,"  and  are  in  "  rebellion  against 
the  Lord  God  Omnipotent  whoruleth!" 

This  is  rather  a  serious  view  of  affairs.  We  must  look 
at  it.  We  are  always  disposed  to  give  men  the  largest 


GOVERNMENTAL   DETERMINATION    CONFRONTED.      333 

liberty  in  the  statement  of  their  opinions  ;  and  never  more 
80  than  when  they  profess  to  set  forth  the  will  of  God. 
As  this  is  a  grave  indictment  brought  by  one  of  the  Lord's 
.servants,  it  deserves  examination.  We  will  let  Dr.  Smyth, 
of  Charleston,  South  Carolina,  make  the  presentment  in 
full.  In  the  article  from  the  Southern  Presbyterian 
Review  for  April,  1863,  before  referred  to,  he  says  : 

But  the  argument  is  lifted  up  to  a  far  higher  platform,  when  we  con 
sider  slavery  in  reference  to  the  word,  providence,  and  government  of 
Cod.  That  God's  providence  is  holy,  wise,  and  powerful ;  that  it 
extendeth  to  all  things  and  all  events ;  our  enemies  themselves  profess 
to  believe,  even  in  their  catechisms.  Slavery,  therefore,  whether  as  a 
form  of  temporal,  political,  organized  society,  it  is  good  or  evil,  is  like 
other  similar  forms  of  evil,  providential ;  and  as  such,  is  under  God's 
holy,  wise,  and  powerful  government,  and  to  be  acted  upon  only  in 
accordance  with  the  principles  of  His  word  and  gospel,  that  by  them 
God  may,  as  it  pleaseth  Him,  continue,  remove,  ameliorate,  or  modify  it, 
as  it  seemeth  to  Him  wise  and  good. 

We  wish  we  could  say  that  Dr.  Smyth,  in  other  parts 
of  this  article  (given  in  the  preceding  chapter),  had  taken 
views  of  God's  "providence"  no  more  in  disagreement 
with  His  word  than  are  found  in  this  extract.  He  is  right 
in  saying  that  it  "extendeth  to  all  things."  He  admits 
also  that  one  of  its  bearings  upon  slavery,  may  be  to 
"  remove"  it,  provided  this  shall  seem  to  God  "  wise  and 
good."  We  are  disposed  then  to  inquire,  What  hinders 
him  from  conceding  that  to  "  remove"  it  is  "  wise  and 
good  ;"  and  that  the  "  things"  now  occurring  within  this 
nation  tending  to  that  end,  "  all"  of  which  are  embraced 
in  God's  providence,  are  proper  agencies  for  such  a  result  ? 
It  is  not  difficult  to  answer  this  question.  He  is  a  believer 
in  the  modern  doctrine,  that  negro  slavery  is  an  "  ordinance 
of  God,"  that  it  is  in  itself  "  wise  and  good,"  and  is  a 
"  blessing"  to  all  concerned ;  and  therefore  that  it  is  "  in 
accordance  with  the  principles  of  God's  word  and  gospel," 


334          PROVIDENTIAL    DESIGNS    IN   THE    REBELLION. 

to  perpetuate  it,  to  vindicate  its  righteousness,  and  to  labor 
for  its  security  and  indefinite  expansion.  lie  thus  does 
not  deem  it  right  to  interfere  with  it  by  any  measures 
whatever ;  for,  as  it  is  "  to  be  acted  upon  only  in  accord 
ance  with  the  principles  of  God's  word  and  gospel," 
and  as  His  word  is  declared  to  be  totally  silent  about 
emancipation,  there  are  no  such  "  principles"  "  in  accord 
ance  with"  which  it  can  be  terminated.  It  must  therefore 
continue.  It  can  never  "  please"  God  to  "  remove"  it 
through  the  agency  of  man  upon  "  the  principles  of  His 
word,"  if  it  be  true,  as  is  claimed,  that  there  are  no  such 
"  principles"  which  meet  the  case.  Nor  is  it  even  within 
the  power  of  simple  omnipotence  to  "remove"  it  "by 
them,"  if  there  are  none.  If,  then,  it  shall  ever  be  removed, 
it  must  be  by  miracle  ;  or  upon  "  principles"  not  revealed ; 
or  in  utter  defiance  of  the  Almighty. 

There  is,  indeed,  an  apparent  concession  in  this  extract, 
—perhaps  a  real  one, — that  there  are  some  "  principles  of 
God's  word,"  "in  accordance  with"  which  slavery  may 
be  removed.  But  nothing  is  more  sure  than  that  all 
Southern  writers,  and  Dr.  Smyth  among  them,  insist  that 
the  "  Gospel"  is  utterly  silent  upon  emancipation ;  that 
there  is  nothing  in  the  New  Testament  about  the  thing  or 
the  process.  All  his  talk  then  about  its  removal  upon 
such  *'  principles"  is  idle.  His  real  position,  as  his  whole 
article  shows,  is  that  which  we  have  given  :  that  slavery 
is  a  divine  institution,  an  "  ordinance,"  to  be  vindicated, 
expanded,  perpetuated. 

OPPOSITION    TO    SLAVERY    FIGHTING    AGAINST    GOD. 

Dr.  Smyth  is  therefore  utterly  opposed  to  any  action 
whatever  for  the  removal  of  slavery ;  and  especially  does 
he  regard  the  measures  of  the  United  States  Government 

O 

impious  and  abhorrent  to  the  last  degree.     But  let  us  hear 


THE    GOVERNMENT   VINDICATED.  335 

him  upon  this  point,  and  then  examine  his  reasoning  and 
conclusions.  The  foregoing  extract  makes  up  his  premises. 
In  the  next  words  immediately  following  the  above  quo 
tation,  and  as  a  deduction  from  them,  he  continues  as  fol 
lows  : 

And  to  wage  a  war  of  extermination  against  slavery, — a  war  in  itself 
wicked  and  unconstitutional  [what  a  becoming  and  sincere  regard  these 
rebels  have  that  the  Constitution  shall  not  be  violated!],  and  carried  on 
in  a  spirit  of  diabolical  perfidy  and  inhumanity, — is  to  fight  against 
God,  and  to  run  against  the  thick  bosses  of  the  Almighty.  It  is 
rebellion  against  the  Lord  God  Omnipotent  who  ruleth.  To  participate 
in  it,  is  to  join  in  conspiracy  against  the  throne  and  empire  of  Heaven. 
And  did  not  the  South  come  up  to  the  help  of  the  Lord  against  the 
mighty,  she  would  involve  herself  in  the  divine  malediction  with  which 
the  inhabitants  of  Meroz  were  cursed. 

Upon  the  foregoing  we  offer  a  few  considerations.  The 
position  in  which  the  Government  of  the  United  States 
and  the  people  who  sustain  it  in  prosecuting  the  war 
against  rebellion  are  here  placed,  would  be  regarded  of 
little  consequence  did  such  effusions  emanate  from  the 
secular  press  of  Richmond  or  Charleston ;  but  coming  as 
they  do  from  a  clergyman  of  high  position  and  influence 
at  the  South,  and  addressed  as  they  are  to  the  more  serious- 
minded  portion  of  thqse  in  rebellion,  they  call  for  an 
examination. 

THE     GOVERNMENT   VINDICATED     IN   DESTROYING    SLAVERY. 

All  argument  upon  "  slavery  in  reference  to  the  word'1'1 
of  God,  we  defer  to  a  succeeding  chapter.  We  say,  how 
ever,  here  and  now,  that  we  admit  that  slavery  is  "  to  be 
acted  upon  only  in  accordance  with  the  principles  of  His 
word  and  Gospel," — so  far  as  there  are  any  which  bear 
upon  the  case,  or  at  least  not  upon  any  "principles"  which 
contravene  any  thing  which  God  has  revealed  in  His 


336  PROVIDENTIAL   DESIGNS    IX   THE    REBELLION. 

"  word," — and  we  are  quite  willing  to  hold  the  Government, 
in  its  present  attitude  towards  slavery,  strictly  to  this  test. 

In  regard,  then,  to  the  chief  matters  contained  in  these 
extracts,  our  position  is,  that  while  we  admit  in  the  main, 
and  for  the  argument's  sake,  Dr.  Smyth's  premises  in  the 
former  about  "  providence,"  we  deny  his  conclusions  in 
the  latter  concerning  the  course  of  the  Government  and 
the  people  who  sustain  it. 

There  is  no  ground  for  dispute  with  Dr.  Smyth  about 
t\\e  justice  of  war.  A  nation  may  engage  in  war  in  a  just 
cause  as  acceptably  to  God  as  it  may  serve  Him  in  any 
other  way.  The  civil  magistrate  is  armed  with  the  sword 
by  God's  express  authority.  Furthermore,  in  a  just  war, 
it  may  be  as  clearly  the  duty  of  an  individual  to  engage, 
as  to  pray ;  and  God  may  accept  the  service.  Dr.  Smyth 
of  course  admits  all  this,  for  he  exhorts  the  South  to  war. 
We  do  not  now  argue  with  Quakers  or  other  non-com 
batants. 

The  only  points  in  question  are  two :  Is  the  United 
States  Government  now  engaged  in  a  just  war?  Is  its 
present  attitude  towards  slavery,  in  this  war,  justifiable  ? 
These  two  points  cover  the  whole  case.  We  take  them 
separately. 

ITS   RIGHT    OF    SELF-PRESERVATION. 

I.  Is  this  a  just  war  on  the  part  of  the  United  States  ? 

We  aim,  on  both  points,  only  to  give  a  synopsis  of  the 
arguments  by  which  the  affirmative  may  be  sustained,  and 
not  to  exhaust  the  subject  or  to  go  into  it  at  length. 

1.  If  God's  word  teaches  any  thing  that  is  plain,  it  is 
this:  that  a  nation  may  justly  draw  the  sword  to  main 
tain  its  authority  against  all  evil-doers,  even  in  the  execu 
tion  of  its  ordinary  legislation ;  and  especially  may  it  do 
this  to  put  down  an  armed  rebellion,  seeking  to  overthrow 


ITS    EIGHT    OF    SELF-PRESERVATION.  337 

its  supreme  authority,  and  to  subvert  lawful  Government, 
which  is  an  ordinance  of  God.  If  a  man  denies  this,  he 
denies  the  very  letter  and  spirit  of  Apostolic  teachings, 
and  admits  a  principle  under  which  it  would  be  impossible 
to  maintain  civil  Government  at  all ;  he  lands  in  anarchy ; 
and,  therefore,  we  cannot  now  have  any  controversy  with 
hirn.  Dr.  Smyth  admits  this  as  a  Scriptural  principle. 
The  South  act  upon  it;  punishing  with  severity,  even  with 
death,  those  whom  they  adjudge  guilty  of  treason  in  rebel 
ling  against  their  rebellion. 

2.  Nothing  is  more  certain  in  point  of  fact  than  this : 
that  the  people  of  the  South  are  now  openly  resisting  the 
supreme  authority  and  lawful  Government  of  the  United 
States ;  even  resisting  "  the  Constitution,  to  which,"  as 
Dr.  Thornwell  says,  "  these  States  swore  allegiance.'1'1  It 
is  perfectly  immaterial  to  the  immediate  issue  in  hand, 
whether  that  resistance  be  called  "  rebellion,"  or  "  revolu 
tion,"  or  by  the  apparently  softer  term,  "  secession."  The 
Southern  orators  and  papers  have  called  it  each  by  turn,  as 
it  suited  their  purpose  It  may  be  one,  or  the  other,  or 
all,  but  it  amounts  to  the  same  thing.  It  is,  in  fact,  armed 
resistance  to  lawful  Government.  It  was  that  at  the  first 
instant  of  the  movement.  It  is  that  still. 

If  those  concerned  complain  of  being  called  "  rebels"  and 
"  traitors,"  and  their  work  "  rebellion," — as  Dr.  Smyth 
and  all  the  rest  loudly  do, — let  the  justice  of  such  com 
plaints  be  tested  by  their  own  standard.  Those  who  have 
claimed  the  right  of  States  to  "  secede"  from  the  Southern 
Confederacy, — as  has  been  done  in  the  Rebel  Congress  by 
disaffected  members, — and  who  have  said  that  they  would 
put  that  right  in  practice  in  certain  contingencies,  have  been 
denounced  in  that  Congress  and  in  the  Richmond  journals  as 
"  traitors  ;"  and  even  the  utterance  of  such  sentiments  has 
been  stigmatized  in  that  body  as  "  treasonable ;"  and  any 


338  PROVIDENTIAL   DESIGNS   IN   THE    REBELLION. 

"  overt  act"  which  should  be  taken  in  that  direction  lias  been 
denounced  as  worthy  of  death.  Such  States,  it  was  said, 
should  be  "restrained  by  the  bayonet."  If,  then,  to 
"secede  from  the  Southern  Confederacy,"  where  the 
principle  of  "  secession"  is  acknowledged  as  fundamental, 
and  out  of  which  that  Confederacy  originated,  be  justly 
deemed  "  treason"  and  "  rebellion,"  then  a  fortiori,  with 
much  stronger  reason  is  it  "  treason''  and  "  rebellion"  for 
the  Southern  States  to  "  secede"  from  the  United  States, 
where  no  such  principle  is  acknowledged.  Laying  aside 
then  the  main  and  conclusive  considerations  on  which  the 
charge  of  rebelling  against  the  lawful  authority  and  Gov 
ernment  of  the  United  States  may  be  sustained  against  the 
Southern  States  and  people,  the  charge  is  amply  sustained 
when  tried  by  their  own  standard. 

As  the  Southern  rebellion  has  taken  the  form  of  armed 
resistance  and  is  making  war,  the  Government  assailed 
has  the  right  to  overcome  this  resistance  by  the  same 
means,  and  is  making  war  for  this  purpose  and  to  main 
tain  its  authority.  As  a  right,  therefore,  a  right  by  the 
word  of  God,  the  Government  of  the  United  States  is 
carrying  on  a  lawful  war  to  maintain  its  lawful  authority. 

DESTRUCTION    OF    SLAVERY    A    LAWFUL    MEANS    TO    THIS 
END. 

II.  Is  the  Government  justified,  in  order  to  its  success 
in  putting  down  rebellion,  in  aiming  to  destroy  slavery  ? 

We  of  course  now  speak  of  slavery  in  the  Rebel  States 
only,  and  of  the  action  of  the  Government  as  confined  to 
its  operations  in  war.  As  the  result  of  the  rebellion,  or 
occasioned  by  it,  we  have  already  stated  that  Congress 
undoubtedly  will,  ultimately,  amend  the  Constitution  and 
prohibit  slavery  in  the  whole  land  forever.  By  its  war 
measures  and  war  power,  the  Government  are  striking  at 


DESTEUCTION    OF    SLAVEKY.  339 

slavery  in  the  whole  rebel  dominions,  and  aim  to  destroy 
it  root  and  branch.  Is  this  right  ? — or,  as  charged,  Is  this 
"to  fight  against  God,"  a  "rebellion  against  the  Lord 
God  Omnipotent  who  ruleth,"  and  a  "  conspiracy  against 
the  throne  and  empire  of  Heaven  ?"  We  sustain  the  Gov 
ernment  in  this  determination,  and  will  give  our  reasons. 

The  grounds  of  our  vindication  are  these :  A  nation  in 
a  just  war  may  adopt  any  measures  for  its  success  which 
are  deemed  necessary,  provided  they  are  not  inconsistent 
with  the  principles  of  justice,  and  are  sustained  by  the  laws 
and  usages  of  war  among  civilized  nations.  Those  laws 
and  usages  permit  a  nation  to  attack  slavery  and  free  the 
slaves  of  an  enemy,  and  use  them  against  the  enemy,  in 
order  to  its  success  in  war  ;  and  of  the  necessity  of  these 
measures  the  party  adopting  them  is  to  be  the  judge. 
This  applies  to  war  between  "  nations"  proper — to  foreign 
war ;  much  more,  on  the  same  authority,  may  these  means 
be  resorted  to  in  putting  down  rebellion. 

The  justification  or  condemnation  of  such  measures,  as 
properly  belonging  or  not  to  the  code  of  war,  cannot  be 
settled  by  an  appeal  to  Scripture,  for  the  word  of  God 
says  nothing  whatever  on  the  subject.  It  is  worse  than 
idle,  therefore,  to  arraign  the  Government  before  the  bar 
of  Revelation,  on  a  matter  where  Revelation  is  utterly 
silent.  The  only  standard  by  which  the  case  can  be 
determined,  is  the  one  already  mentioned  :  the  laws  of  war 
as  illustrated  in  the  usages  of  civilized  nations;  and  to 
give  the  case  the  fairest  chance,  we  are  quite  willing  to 
take  our  examples  from  those  nations  of  modern  times 
where  Christianity  has  the  greatest  influence.  Taking 
these  principles  for  our  guide,  and  scanning  the  facts 
which  the  course  of  the  Government  has  developed,  and  it 
will  be  seen  that  the  Government  has  not  only  kept  within 
the  limits  of  its  authority,  in  reference  to  this  simple  issue, 


340         PROVIDENTIAL   DESIGNS   IN   THE    REBELLION. 

as  determined  by  the  criterion  mentioned,  but  has  con 
ducted  with  a  forbearance  toward  slavery  in  the  Rebel 
States  which  has  excited  the  wonder  of  other  nations, 
and  upon  which  history  will  record  its  judgment  for 
remarkable  leniency. 

Before  citing  the  authorities  to  sustain  the  positions 
taken,  let  us  note  the  course  which  the  Government  has 
pursued. 

FORBEARANCE    OF   THE    GOVERNMENT   WITH    SLAVERY. 

We  have  given  the  proof,  and  the  South  universally 
admit  the  fact,  that  their  resistance  to  the  Government, — 
their  "secession," — was  to  establish  more  securely  the 
institution  of  slavery,  which  they  imagined  to  be  in  peril 
from  the  Government.  Slavery  is  thus,  in  a  sense  well 
understood,  the  cause  of  the  rebellion  and  the  war.  The 
President  and  the  party  that  put  him  in  power  were  pub 
licly  pledged,  previous  to  his  election,  and  also  in  his  Inau 
gural  Address,  not  to  interfere  with  slavery  where  it  was 
lawfully  established.  The  whole  South  knew  of  these 
pledges.  They  were  kept  inviolate.  The  proof  of  all  this 
we  have  given.  When  the  rebellion  had  proceeded  so  far 
as  actually  to  fire  upon  the  flag  and  vessels  of  the  United 
States  in  the  harbor  of  Charleston,  and  when  the  Gov 
ernment  called  out  forces  to  put  it  down,  the  President 
and  Congress  still  maintained  the  principle  of  non-inter 
ference  referred  to,  and  uniformly  took  the  ground,  and 
declared  by  acts,  resolutions,  and  proclamations,  the  doc 
trine,  that  the  war  was  "  not  waged  for  any  purpose  of 
overthrowing  or  interfering  with  the  rights  or  established 
institutions  of  the  States  [meaning  thereby,  especially, 
slavery] ;  but  to  defend  and  maintain  the  supremacy  of 
the  Constitution,  and  to  preserve  the  Union,  with  all  the 


FORBEARANCE    OF   THE    GOVERNMENT.  341 

dignity,  equality,  and  rights  of  the  several  States  unim- 
paired."* 

It  was  found  at  length,  that,  instead  of  being  an  element 
of  weakness,  as  at  first  supposed,  slavery  was  an  element 
of  great  strength  to  the  rebellion ;  indeed,  its  vital  sup 
port,  as  the  rebels  themselves  declared.  It  was  believed, 
that,  as  slavery  in  the  Rebel  States  was  in  open  conflict 
with  the  Government,  one  or  the  other  must  be  destroyed 
in  the  region  over  which  the  rebellion  held  sway.  It  was 
then  resolved  to  strike  the  rebellion  in  its  most  efficient 
support,  and  thus  save  the  Government  from  its  most 
deadly  enemy.  As  the  Government  was  clothed  with 
God's  authority  to  sustain  itself  and  put  down  the  rebel 
lion,  it  was  clothed  with  God's  authority  to  use  all  neces 
sary  and  lawful  means  to  that  end.  It  was,  from  the 
nature  of  the  case,  constituted,  for  the  time  being,  the  sole 
judge  of  the  essential  means,  being  responsible  to  God  and 
the  people.f 

*  These  words  are  from  the  resolutions  passed  unanimously  by  the  House  of  Rep 
resentatives,  July,  1861,  offered  by  Mr.  Crittenden,  of  Kentucky. 

t  We  do  not  of  course  entertain  any  question  that  may  be  raised  here,  as  between 
the  simple  power  of  the  President,  by  Proclamation  or  otherwise,  as  Commander-in- 
Chief  of  the  Army  and  Navy,  and  Congress,  touching  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Execu 
tive  and  Legislative  branches  of  the  Government  over  matters  of  war.  It  is  by  no 
means  essential  to  the  sole  point  in  hand.  When  we  speak  of  the  Government  in  its 
attitude  toward  slavery  under  the  laws  of  war,  we  speak  simply  of  the  authority  of 
the  United  States  to  put  down  rebellion,  whether  the  particular  measures  of  the  war 
are  determined  by  the  President,  as  Commander-ln-Chief,  or  by  the  Executive  and 
Legislative  branches  of  the  Government  together.  As  a  fact,  however,  Congress  has 
substantially  sustained,  either  tacitly  or  by  direct  legislation,  all  the  acts  of  the 
Executive  in  regard  to  slavery.  In  a  speech  made  in  Chicago,  July  14,  1864,  by  the 
Hon.  Isaac  1ST.  Arnold,  a  member  of  the  present  Congress,  he  says  :  "On  the  18th  of 
January,  1864, 1  introduced  the  following  bill,  which  has  been  embodied  substantially 
in  another  which  passed  Congress:  '•Be,  it  enacted,  &c.,  That  in  all  the  States  and 
parts  of  States  designated  in  said  Proclamation  as  in  rebellion  (the  Proclamation 
against  slavery,  January  1,  1868),  the  re-enslaving  or  holding,  or  attempting  to  hold 
in  slavery,  any  person  who  shall  have  been  declared  free  by  said  Proclamation,  or 
any  of  their  descendants,  otherwise  than  in  the  punishment  of  crime,  whereof  the 
accused  shall  have  been  duly  convicted,  is  and  shall  be  forever  prohibited,  any  law 
of  any  State  to  the  contrary  notwithstanding.1"  The  Executive  and  Legislative 
branches  of  the  Government  are  thus  united  in  support  of  that  measure. 


.342         PROVIDENTIAL    DESIGNS    IX   THE   REBELLION. 


EMANCIPATION    PROCLAMATION. 

When  the  Government  determined  to  strike  at  slavery, 
by  the  Proclamation  of  September  22,  1862,  the  war  had 
been  going  on  for  a  year  and  a  half  with  varying  success. 
The  measure  was  deemed  a  necessity,  and  was  adopted, 
not  for  the  purpose  of  interfering  with  slavery,  in  itself 
considered,  but  to  put  down  the  rebellion,  and  as  a  means 
solely  to  that  end ;  the  President  stating,  in  this  Procla 
mation,  "  that  hereafter  as  heretofore,  the  war  will  be  pros 
ecuted  for  the  object  of  practically  restoring  the  constitu 
tional  relation  between  the  United  States  and  the  people 
thereof  in  those  States  in  which  that  relation  is,  or  may  be, 
suspended  or  disturbed."  In  this  Proclamation,  one  hun 
dred  days  were  allowed  to  the  people  of  the  States  in  re 
bellion  to  lay  down  their  arms  and  save  the  institution 
harmless ;  and  loyal  persons  in  rebel  districts  were  prom 
ised  compensation  "for  all  losses  by  acts  of  the  United 
States,  including  the  loss  of  slaves ;"  a  promise  which  any 
Congress  would  have  felt  bound  to  redeem.  On  the  non- 
acceptance  of  these  terms,  all  slaves  in  rebel  districts  to  be 
designated  on  the  1st  of  January,  1863,  were  to  be  declared 
free.  The  terms  proposed  not  having  been  accepted,  the 
President  issued  a  Proclamation  of  this  date,  declaring  all 
slaves  within  such  districts  "henceforward  free."  He 
here  states  as  before,  this,  "  as  a  fit  and  necessary  war 
measure  for  suppressing  the  rebellion."  He  enjoins  "upon 
the  people  so  declared  to  be  free,  to  abstain  from  all  vio 
lence,  unless  in  necessary  self-defence,"  and  exhorts  them 
to  "labor  faithfully  for  reasonable  wages;"  declares  that 
"  such  persons  of  suitable  condition  will  be  received  into 
the  armed  service  of  the  United  States ;"  and  concludes 
thus :  "  And  upon  this,  sincerely  believed  to  be  an  act  of 
justice,  warranted  by  the  Constitution,  upon  military  ne- 


ITS   FINAL   DETERMINATION   JUSTIFIED.  343 

cessity,  I  invoke  the  considerate  judgment  of  mankind  and 
the  gracious  favor  of  Almighty  God." 

Upon  the  principles  laid  down  in  justification  of  the 
Government  for  attempting  the  overthrow  of  slavery  as  a 
means  for  suppressing  rebellion,  its  wonderful  forbearance 
is  illustrated  in  this,  that  what  it  finally  did  on  the  1st  of 
January,  1863,  after  eighteen  and  a  half  months  of  war,  it 
might  have  done  on  the  15th  of  April,  1861,  when  the 
President  issued  his  first  Proclamation  for  troops  for  the 
same  purpose. 

ITS    FINAL    DETERMINATION    JUSTIFIED. 

We  have  now  to  see  whether  competent  authorities  sus 
tain  the  position  we  have  taken.  The  issue  made  is 
reduced  to  this :  to  destroy  slavery  in  the  Rebel  States,  in 
order  to  overthrow  rebellion  and  restore  and  maintain 
the  national  authority.  Is  the  destruction  of  slavery  a 
lawful  means  to  that  lawful  end  ?  Dr.  Smyth  will  not 
pretend  that  on  this  point  we  have  any  express  revelation 
in  "  the  word  of  God."  For  him,  therefore,  to  assert, 
that  u  to  wage  a  war  of  extermination  against  slavery,"  is 
"  in  ifxelf  wicked,"  and  is  "  rebellion  against  God,"  is  to 
assume  the  whole  case. 

The  present  object, — to  maintain  the  complete  authority 
and  jurisdiction  of  the  Government, — is,  by  "  the  word 
of  God,"  a  lawful  object ;  and  war,  as  a  means  to  that  end, 
is,  by  "the  word  of  God,"  lawful.  But  upon  the  special 
measures  of  war  for  such  a  purpose,  "  the  word  of  God" 
is  silent.  There  is,  then,  no  other  course  to  be  taken, — 
no  other  safe  criterion  of  judgment, — but  to  fall  back  upon 
the  laws  of  war,  as  seen  in  the  usages  of  civilized  nnd 
Christian  nations ;  those  principles  and  usages  which  they 
regard  as  founded  in  the  soundest  reason  and  justice. 
Here  the  authorities  to  sustain  the  United  States  Govern- 


344          PROVIDENTIAL   DESIGNS    IN   THE    EEBELLION. 

ment  in  its  present  course  toward  slavery  in  the  Rebel 
States  are  overwhelming. 

These  authorities  may  be  reduced  to  the  following 
points  :  General  principles  of  the  laws  of  war,  as  laid  down 
by  writers  on  the  laws  of  nations ;  the  usages  of  the  most 
enlightened  nations  under  these  laws  ;  decisions  of  national 
authorities  on  cases  submitted;  the  practice  of  military 
commanders,  sustained  by  their  respective  Governments ; 
the  course  of  the  United  States  Government  in  former 
wars ;  the  opinions  of  eminent  statesmen,  and  among  them 
statesmen  of  our  own  country,  uttered  in  former  times, 
concerning  the  possible  occurrence  of  just  such  an  emer 
gency  as  that  in  which  the  United  States  Government  now 
finds  itself  placed. 

The  amount  of  this  testimony  bears  upon  two  points, 
all  that  are  essential  to  the  present  case :  that  a  nation  at 
war  may  emancipate  the  slaves  of  another  nation  with 
which  it  is  at  war,  as  a  means  to  its  military  success  ;  and 
that  it  may  use  those  thus  emancipated  in  its  military 
service. 

SUSTAINED   BY   THE   LAWS    OF    WAE. 

In  regard  to  the  Laws  of  War,  the  general  principles  to 
which  we  refer  are  sufficiently  comprehended  in  the  fol 
lowing  points :  Standard  writers  declare,  that  "  war, 
when  duly  declared  or  officially  recognized,  gives  to  one 
belligerent  the  right  to  deprive  the  oth,er  of  every  thing 
which  might  add  to  his  strength,  and  enable  him  to  carry 
on  hostilities"  This  " general  right"  is  limited  by  .the 
"  law  of  nations  ;"  and  the  limitations,  with  many  things 
embraced  within  them,  are  specified  by  all  standard  wri 
ters;  but  among  these,  slaves  are  not  mentioned.  They 
come  under  that  general  designation  of  "property"  which 
a  belligerent  may  take  and  use  against  the  enemy.  The 


SUSTAINED   BY   THE    LAWS    OF   WAR.  345 

laws  and  usages  of  nations,  ancient  and  modern,  deem 
them  liable  to  capture.* 

So  well  settled  was  this  principle  under  the  Roman  law, 
— and  the  same  principle  obtains  among  other  nations 
where  slaves  are  recognized  as  mere  "  property," — that 
the  "  captor  holds  by  a  title  which  will  become  complete 
by  the  return  of  peace,  without  any  treaty  stipulation 
prescribing  the  contrary  ;  but  until  that  time  the  title  is 
liable  to  be  lost  by  recapture,  and  the  application  of  what 
is  known  in  law  as  the  jus  postliminii"  This  latter 
feature  of  the  Roman  law  was  to  this  effect :  Under  it 
certain  persons  and  certain  things,  captured  in  war,  were 
restored  to  their  former  condition,  "on  coming  again 
under  the  power  of  the  nation  to  which  they  formerly  belong 
ed  ;"  as,  for  example,  the  son  came  again  under  the  power 

*  Upon  the  general  principles  of  the  Laws  of  War  referred  to,  are  the  following 
authorities,  from  which  it  will  be  seen,  that  this  important  principle  in  addition  to 
those  mentioned  is  laid  down,  that  all  persons  belonging  to  "hostile  States,"  are 
made  "  legal  enemies"  by  war,— thus,  in  its  application  to  the  case  in  hand,  giving 
the  Government  authority  over  all  the  slaves  in  the  Kebel  States  :  bt  It  has  already 
been  stated,  that  war,  when  duly  declared  or  officially  recognized,  makes  legal  ene 
mies  of  all  individual  members  of  hostile  States ;  that  it  also  extends  to  property, 
and  gives  to  one  belligerent  the  right  to  deprive  the  other  of  every  thing  which 
might  add  to  his  strength,  and  enable  him  to  carry  on  hostilities.  But  this  gene 
ral  right  is  subject  to  numerous  modifications  and  limitations,  which  have  been 
introduced  by  custom  and  the  positive  law  of  nations.  Thus,  although,  by  the 
extreme  right  of  war,  all  property  of  an  enemy  is  deemed  hostile  and  subject  to 
seizure,  it  by  no  means  follows  that  all  such  property  is  subject  to  appropriation  or 
condemnation  ;  for  the  positive  law  of  nations  distinguishes,  not  only  between  th« 
property  of  the  State  and  that  of  its  individual  subjects,  but  also  between  that  of  dif 
ferent  classes  of  subjects,  and  between  difterent  kinds  of  property  of  the  same 
subject."  "All  implements  of  war,  military  and  naval  stores,  and,  in  general,  all 
movable  property  belonging  to  the  hostile  State,  is  subject  to  be  seized,  and  appro 
priated  to.  the  use  of  the  captor."  "  There  is  one  species  of  movable  property,  be 
longing  to  a  belligerent  State,  which  is  exempt,  not  only  from  plunder  and  destruc 
tion,  but  also  from  capture  and  conversion,  viz.,  State  papers,  public  archives, 
historical  records,  judicial  and  legal  documents,  land  titles,"  &c.  u  The  reasons  of 
this  rule  are  manifest :  their  destruction  would  not  operate  to  promote,  in  any 
respect,  the  «v/r."  "  It  would  be  an  injury  done  in  war,  beyond  the  necessity  of 
war,  and  therefore  illegal,  barbarous,  and  cruel."— HallecK's  Int.  Law,  and  Law  of 

War,  Ch.  XIX.  sees.  1,  T,  9. 


346          PROVIDENTIAL   DESIGNS   IN   THE    REBELLION. 

of  his  parent,  and  the  recaptured  slave  came  into  posses 
sion  of  his  former  master,  instead  of  becoming  the  prop 
erty  of  the  State. 

The  principle  is  thus  well  and  universally  established, 
that  slaves,  coming  into  possession  of  a  belligerent  or  cap 
tured  from  an  enemy  in  war,  are  subject  to  the  captor's 
disposal,  unless  recaptured.  This  is  settled  by  the  laws 
of  war,  as  understood  alike  among  ancient  and  modern 
nations.  They  differ  on  one  point.  In  ancient  times,  the 
captor  might  sell  them,  or  make  any  other  disposition  of 
them,. as  with  other  captured  "property;"  or  he  might 
free  them.  In  either  case,  whether  regarded  as  property 
or  as  freedmen,  he  could  employ  them  against  the  enemy 
in  any  capacity,  just  as  any  other  property  or  freemen 
under  his  control  might  be  thus  employed.  But  the  laws 
of  war  as  seen  in  the  usages  among  nations  of  modern 
times,  with  rare  exceptions,  restrict  the  disposition  of 
slaves  captured  in  war  to  giving  them  their  freedom ;  that 
is,  do  not  allow  their  re-enslavement. 

SUSTAINED    BY    EXAMPLES    OF    SEVERAL   NATIONS. 

The  right  by  the  laws  of  nations,  and  the  actual  prac 
tice  under  the  laws  of  war,  to  emancipate  the  slaves  of  an 
enemy,  is  unquestionable,  and  is  illustrated  by  many  ex 
amples  ;  and  the  cases  very  fully  sustain  the  position  that 
no  other  proper  disposition  can  be  made  of  captured  slaves 
than  to  give  them  their  freedom. 

This  right,  as  a  war  measure,  has  been  often  exercised 
in  modern  times :  as,  for  example,  by  Great  Britain,  in  the 
war  of  the  Revolution  with  her  American  Colonies,  and  in 
that  -with  the  United  States  in  1812  ;*  by  France,  in  the 

*  The  Proclamations  of  Lord  Dunraore,  Lord  Cornwallis,  and  Sir  Honry  Clinton, 
are  well  known.  In  the  war  of  the  Revolution,  they  received  thousands  of  slaves 
into  the  British  army,  giving  them  their  freedom.  By  the  Treaty  of  Peace  in  1788, 


ILLUSTBATED    BY    CASES    IN   THE   UNITED   STATES.     347 

Island  of  St.  Domingo,  in  1793-94;  by  Spain  in  Colum 
bia,  South  America,  through  Generals  Murillo  and  Bolivar ; 
and  by  the  United  States,  in  some  of  its  wars,  through 
Generals  Jesup,  Taylor,  and  Gaines,  whose  acts  were 
sustained  and  approved  by  Congress,  and  by  several 
Presidents. 

ILLUSTRATED  BY  CASES  IN  THE  UNITED  STATES. 

In  regard  to  the  United  States,  the  practice  of  the  Gov 
ernment  in  former  wars  has  been  to  consider  slaves  cap 
tured  in  war  as  prisoners  of  war,  and  to  declare  and 
insure  their  freedom. 

In  1836,  General  Jesup  employed  certain  "fugitive 
slaves"  as  guides,  and  for  their  services  gave  them  their 
freedom  and  sent  them  to  the  West  to  enjoy  it.  His  con 
duct  was  approved  by  the  administrations  of  Presidents 
Van  Buren  and  John  Tyler.  The  case  of  Louis,  which 
occurred  in  the  same  year,  is  in  point.  He  was  the 
escaped  slave  of  Pacheco,  and  had  fought  against  the 
United  States.  On  his  being  captured,  and  while  held  as 
a  prisoner  of  war,  his  master  demanded  him  as  his  prop 
erty  :  but  the  demand  was  refused,  and  Louis  was  declared 

the  British  Government  promised  to  take  no  slaves  out  of  the  country,  but  a  great 
many  went  with  them.  On  the  complaint  of  General  Washington  for  such  violation 
of  the  Treaty,  and  a  demand  for  their  return,  Sir  Guy  Carleton  admitted  that  his 
Government  was  bound  to  make  compensation,  but  insisted  on  the  absolute  freedom 
of  those  taken  away,  declaring  that  "His  Majesty"  did  not  allow  his  officers  to  take 
from  "  these  negroes  the  liberty  of  which  he  found  them  possessed."  Certain  adju 
dicated  cases  by  the  British  authorities  go  even  beyond  this.  Certain  slaves  on  board 
the  American  brig  Creole,  destined  from  Hampton  Eoads  to  New  Orleans  mutinied, 
killed  a  slave-owner,  and  compelled  the  crew  to  take  the  vessel  into  Nassau,  a  British 
port.  The  authorities  examined  the  case,  found  nineteen  concerned  in  the  murder,  but 
gave  the  rest  their  liberty.  The  British  Government,  "on  grounds  of  comity,"  made 
compensation  for  the  released  slaves,  but  refused  to  return  them.  A  decision  of 
Chief-Justice  Best,  of  England,  upon  the  rights  of  negroes,  in  the  case  of  Admiral 
Cockburn,  upon  whose  vessel  escaped  slaves  had  taken  refuge,  is  important.  He 
declared:  "  He  was  not  bound  to  receive  them  upon  his  ship  in  the  first  instance, 
but  having  done  so,  he  could  no  more  have  forced  them  back  into  slavery  than  he 
could  have  committed  them  to  the  deep." — Cited  in  Phillimore's  International  Law. 

16 


348  PROVIDENTIAL    DESIGNS    IN    THE    REBELLION. 

free.  The  course  of  General  Jesup  was  sustained  and 
approved  by  the  President  and  his  Cabinet ;  and  at  a  sub 
sequent  period,  when  Pacheco  laid  his  claim  for  compen 
sation  for  the  loss  of  Louis  before  Congress,  that  body 
sustained  the  Administration  by  rejecting  a  bill  for  such 
purpose. 

In  the  year  1838,  General  Zachary  Taylor  captured  cer 
tain  persons,  during  the  war  in  Florid n,  who  were  claimed 
as  fugitive  slaves.  Certain  citizens  of  that  State  demanded 
their  release  and  restoration.  Old  "  Rough  and  Ready" 
told  them  that  he  had  none  but  prisoners  of  war.  They 
wished  to  see  them,  to  ascertain  if  he  had  their  slaves  in  his 
possession.  He  would  not  grant  their  request,  and  bid 
them  depart.  On  this  being  reported  to  the  War  Depart 
ment,  his  course  was  approved  by  the  President ;  and  the 
slaves  were  declared  free  and  sent  to  the  West. 

Another  case  occurred  in  1838,  in  the  Southwestern 
Department  of  the  Army,  which  is  very  broad  in  its  rela 
tions  to  the  present  war,  and  the  status  of  the  slave  in 
regard  to  the  laws  of  war.  A  large  number  of  fugitive 
slaves  and  Indians,  who  had  been  captured  in  war  in 
Florida,  had  been  ordered  West  of  the  Mississippi.  Some 
of  the  former  were  claimed  at  New  Orleans  by  their 
owners,  and  the  case  was  brought  into  Court.  General 
Edmund  P.  Gaines  was  then  in  command  of  that  Depart 
ment.  He  refused  to  give  up  the  fugitives  on  the  demand 
of  the  sheriff,  and  made  his  defence  in  court  in  person. 
His  reasons  for  refusal  were  as  follows : 

That  these  men,  women,  and  children,  were  captured  in  war;  that,  as 
Commander  of  that  Military  Department,  he  held  them  subject  only  to  the 
order  of  the  National  Executive ;  that  he  could  recognize  no  other  power 
in  time  of  war,  as  authorized  to  take  prisoners  from  his  possession. 
He  asserted  that  in  time  of  war,  all  slaves  were  belligerents  as  ivell  as 
their  master*.  The  slave-men  cultivate  the  earth  and  supply  provisions. 
The  women  cook  the  food  and  nurse  the  sick,  and  contribute  to  the 


ANOTHER  CASE. EMPEROR  ALEXANDER.      349 

maintenance  of  the  war  often  more  than  the  same  number  of  males.  The 
slave  children  equally  contribute  whatever  they  are  able  to  the  support 
of  the  war.  The  military  officer  can  enter  inco  no  judicial  examination 
of  the  claim  of  one  man  to  the  bone  and  muscle  of  another,  as  property ; 
nor  could  he,  as  a  military  officer,  know  what  the  laws  of  Florida  were 
while  engaged  in  maintaining  the  Federal  Government  by  force  of  arms. 
In  such  a  case,  he  could  only  be  guided  by  the  laws  of  war ;  and  what 
ever  may  be  the  laws  of  any  State,  they  must  yield  to  the  safety  of  the 
Federal  Government. — House  Doc.  No.  225,  25th  Congress. 

The  result  in  the  foregoing  case  was,  that  it  was  dis 
missed,  the  slaves  were  sent  to  the  West,  and  became  free. 

ANOTHER  CASE. EMPEROR  ALEXANDER. 

A  case  of  great  importance  was  decided,  growing  out 
of  the  war  of  1812,  in  which  the  United  States  and  Great 
Britain  were  parties ;  one  point  of  which  was  referred  for 
adjudication  to  the  Emperor  Alexander  of  Russia.  The 
British,  acting  according  to  the  laws  of  war,  had  captured 
a  large  nu;r.ber  of  slaves.  The  Treaty  of  Ghent,  which 
fixed  the  terms  of  peace,  required  that  compensation  for 
some  of  those  then  in  their  possession  should  be  made  ;  but 
it  was  for  those  only  that  were,  at  the  time  of  the  ratifica 
tion  of  the  Treaty,  within  the  districts  to  be  delivered  up  to 
the  United  States.  The  Government,  under  President 
Madison,  did  not  claim  that  those  who  had  been  set  free, 
and  sent  during  the  war  beyond  the  limits  of  the  United 
States,  should  even  be  paid  for  /  much  less  that  they 
should  be  delivered  up  to  their  masters,  to  be  again 
remitted  to  slavery.  Here  was  a  clear  acknowledgment  on 
the  part  of  the  United  States,  that,  by  the  laws  of  war, 
slaves  captured  in  war  are  free,  thenceforward  and  for 
ever;  and  that  they  are  not  even  to  be  paid  for,  except 
upon  special  stipulation  between  the  parties  at  war.  The 
point  which  was  submitted  to  the  Russian  Emperor  grew 
out  of  the  construction  of  the  Treaty.  The  British  Gov- 


350  PROVIDENTIAL    DESIGNS    IN   THE    KEBELLION. 

ernment  contended  that  the  Treaty  did  not  include,  for 
compensation,  slaves  who  were  still  on  British  vessels 
which  were  lying,  at  the  time  of  the  ratification,  in  Ameri 
can  waters.  The  Emperor  decided  against  the  British 
interpretation,  and  gives  the  grounds  of  his  decision  thus  : 
"  It  is  upon  the  construction  of  the  text  of  the  article  as  it 
stands,  that  the  arbitrator's  decision  should  be  founded." 
The  British  Government  objecting,  the  Emperor  adds  : 
"The  Emperor  having,  by  mutual  consent  of  the  two 
plenipotentiaries,  given  an  opinion  founded  solely  upon 
the  sense  which  results  from  the  text  of  the  article  in  dis 
pute,  does  not  think  himself  called  upon  to  decide  any 
question  relative  to  what  the  laws  of  war  permit  or  forbid 
to  belligerents."  This  setting  of  "  the  text  of  the  article" 
construed  over  against  "  the  laws  of  war,"  in  this  manner, 
leads  to  the  conclusion  that  the  Emperor,  at  that  time  "  the 
largest  slave-holder  in  the  world,"  deemed  that  these  laws 
allowed  the  emancipation  of  slaves  captured  in  war,  and 
that  when  so  emancipated  they  could  not  be  recovered. 

These  numerous  cases  show  conclusively  that  the  United 
States  Government  lias  maintained  the  doctrine,  in  its 
military  and  civil  administration,  that,  by  the  laws  of  war, 
slaves  captured  in  war  are,  ipso  facto,  thenceforward  and 
forever  FREE.* 

OPINIONS    OF    EMINENT    STATESMEN. 

The  general  doctrine  maintained  in  these  examples  by 
the  United  States,  accords  with  the  sentiments  of  her  most 
eminent  statesmen.  Thomas  Jeiferson,  when  complaining 

*  To  this  there  is  an  exception ;  but,  as  an  exception,  it  serves  to  confirm  the  rule 
otherwise  so  fully  established  and  illustrated  by  actual  cases.  Our  Government 
maintained  the  opposite  doctrine  against  Great  Britain  in  1820,  when  John  Qiiincy 
Adams  was  Secretary  of  State  ;  but  that  great  statesman  has  loft  it  on  record,  that 
while  he  faithfully  represented  his  Government  on  that  point,  he  totally  dissented 
from  the  doctrine  itself.  He  says  :  "  It  was  utterly  against  my  judgment  and  wishes: 
but  I  was  obliged  to  submit,  and  prepared  the  requisite  dispatches.1" 


OPINIONS    OF    EMINENT    STATESMEN.  351 

of  the  acts  of  Lord  Cornwallis,  in  the  Revolutionary  war, 
admits  the  principle  that  slaves  may  be  taken  from  an 
enemy  in  war,  and  that  when  taken  may  be  freed.  In  a 
letter  to  Dr.  Gordon,  found  in  his  works,  he  says  : 

From  an  estimate  I  made  at  that  time  (1779),  on  the  best  informa 
tion  I  could  collect,  I  suppose  the  State  of  Virginia  lost,  under  Lord 
Cornwallis's  hand,  that  year,  about  thirty  thousand  slaves.  *  *  * 
lie  used,  as  was  to  be  expected,  all  my  stock  of  cattle,  sheep,  and  hogs, 
for  the  sustenance  of  his  army,  and  carried  off  all  the  horses  capable  of 
service.  *  *  *  He  carried  off  also  about  thirty  slaves.  Had  this 
Itcen  to  give  them  freedom,  he  wouM  have  done  right ;  but  it  was  to  con 
sign  them  to  inevitable  death  from  the  small-pox  and  putrid  fever  then 
raging  in  his  camp. 

In  a  debate  in  the  House  of  Representatives  in  1836, 
John  Quincy  Adams  announced  what  it  would  be  compe 
tent  for  the  Government  to  do  with  slavery,  under 
precisely  the  circumstances  that  now  exist.  As  a  states 
man,  his  views,  uttered  in  the  following  sentence,  com 
mand  respect : 

From  the  instant  that  your  slaveholding  States  become  the  theatre  of 
war,  civil,  servile,  or  foreign,  from  that  instant  the  war  powers  of  Con 
gress  extend  to  interference  with  the  institution  of  slavery  in  every 
way  in  which  it  can  be  interfered  with,  from  a  claim  of  indemnity  for 
slaves  taken  or  destroyed,  to  the  cession  of  the  State  burdened  with 
slavery  to  a  foreign  power. 

Again,  in  the  House  of  Representatives,  in  1842,  after 
stating  that  slavery  was  abolished  in  Colombia,  South 
America,  first  by  the  Spanish  Military  Commander,  Gen 
eral  Murillo,  and  then  by  the  American  General  Bolivar, 
simply  by  a  military  order  given  at  the  head  of  the  army, 
and  that  its  abolition  continued  to  this  day,  Mr.  Adams 
says : 

In  a  state  of  actual  war,  the  laws  of  war  take  precedence  over  civil 
laws  and  municipal  institutions.  I  lay  this  down  as  the  law  of  nations. 
I  cay  that  the  military  authority  takes  for  the  time  the  place  of  all 


352  PROVIDENTIAL    DESIGNS    IN    THE    REBELLION. 

municipal  institutions,  slavery  among  the  rest;  and  that,  under  that  state 
of  things,  so  far  from  its  being  true,  that  the  States  where  slavery 
exists  have  the  exclusive  management  of  the  subject,  not  only  the  Presi 
dent  of  the  United  Slates,  but  the  commander  of  the  army,  has  the  power  to 
order  tht  emancipation  of  the  slaves.  *  *  *  When  your  country  is 
actually  in  war,  whether  it  be  a  war  of  invasion  or  a  war  of  insurrec 
tion,  Congress  has  power  to  carry  on  the  war,  and  must  carry  it  on 
according  to  the  laws  of  war ;  and,  by  the  laws  of  war,  an  invaded 
country  has  all  its  laws  and  municipal  institutions  swept  by  the  board, 
and  martial  law  takes  the  place  of  them. 

If  we  choose  to  go  back  to  the  times  of  our  Revolu 
tionary  war,  we  find  legislation  in  abundance  by  the  States, 
both  South,  North,  and  by  Congress,  for  recruiting  the 
army  of  Washington  from  among  slaves  ;  and  this  legis 
lation  provided  that  those  slaves  should  receive  the  boon 
of  freedom  for  their  services  ;*  and  this  course  was 
sustained  by  the  most  eminent  patriots  of  that  era. 

*  Among  other  instances  of  legislation,  "In  Congress,  March  29,  1779,"  it  was 
"  Resolved,  That  it  be  recommended  to  the  States  of  South  Carolina  and  Georgia,  if 
they  shall  think  the  same  expedient,  to  take  measures  immediately  for  raising  three 
thousand  able-bodied  negroes ;  that  the  said  negroes  be  formed  into  separate  corps, 
as  battalions,  according  to  the  arrangements  adopted  for  the  main  army ;"  and  "  that 
every  negro  who  shall  well  and  faithfully  serve  as  a  soldier  to  the  end  of  the  present 
war,  and  shall  then  return  his  arms,  lie  emancipated,  and  receive  the  sum  of  fifty 
dollars."  Many  of  the  States  acted  without  any  recommendation  from  Congress. 
The  General  Assembly  of  Rhode  Island  adopted  the  following:  "  Whereas,  History 
affords  us  frequent  precedents  of  the  wisest,  the  freest,  and  bravest  nations  having 
liberated  their  slaves,  and  enlisted  them  as  soldiers  to  fight  in  defence  of  their 
country.  *  *  *  Resolved,  That  every  slave  so  enlisting,  shall,  upon  his  passing 
muster,  <feo.,  be  immediately  discharged  from  the  service  of  his  master  or  mistress^ 
and  be  absolutely  free,  as  though  he  had  never  been  encumbered  with  any  kind  of 
servitude  or  slavery."  In  Virginia,  certain  slaveholders  sent  their  slaves  to  the 
army,  with  a  "  promise"  of  freedom,  but  after  the  war  attempted  to  re-enslave  them  ; 
showing  some  bad  faith  in  Old  as  in  Modern  Virginia.  But  perhaps  this  bad  blood 
did  not  then  run  in  the  veins  of  the  "first  families,"  as  it  has  since  done,  for  the 
General  Assembly  of  that  State,  by  solemn  enactment,  rebuked  such  perfidy,  in 
1783.  in  "  An  Ac*  directing  the  Emancipation  of  certain  slaves  who  had  served  as 
soldiers  in  this  State,  and  for  the  Emancipation  of  the  slave  Aberdeen."  The  depth 
of  this  perfidy  is  seen  in  two  or  three  facts  stated  in  this  Act:  that  "  many  persons 
in  this  State  had  caused  their  slaves  to  enlist,"  they  "having  tendered  such  slaves" 
to  the  recruiting  officers  as  "substitutes"  for  their  own  dear  selves,  "at  the  same 
time  representing  to  such  recruiting  officers,  that  the  slaves,  so  enlisted,  were 


OPINIONS    OF    EMINENT    STATESMEN.  353 

Alexander  Hamilton,  in  a  letter  to  John  Jay,  in  1779, 
speaking  of  these  measures,  says  :  "  An  essential  part  of 
the  plan  is  to  give  them  their  freedom  with  their  muskets." 
This,  he  said,  would  "have  a  good  influence  on  those  who 
remain,  by  opening  a  door  to  their  emancipation" 

James  Madison,  in  a  letter  to  Joseph  Jones,  in  1780, 
advocating  the  policy  of  arming  and  freeing  the  slaves, 
says: 

I  am  glad  to  find  the  Legislature  (of  Virginia)  persist  in  their  resolu 
tion  to  recruit  their  line  of  the  army  for  the  war ;  though  without  deci 
ding  on  the  expediency  of  the  mode  under  their  consideration,  would  it 
not  be  as  well  to  liberate  and  make  soldiers  at  once  of  the  blacks  themselves, 
as  to  make  them  instruments  for  enlisting  white  soldiers  ?  It  would 
certainly  be  more  consonant  with  the  principles  of  liberty,  which  ought 
never  to  be  lost  sight  of  in  a  contest  for  liberty. 

Thus,  the  most  eminent  statesmen  of  the  early  days  of 
the  Republic  took  the  ground  that  slaves  might  properly 
be  employed  in  the  armies  of  the  Union,  and  that  all  such 
should  be  voluntarily  emancipated. 

freeman"  and  that  "the  former  owners  have  attempted  again  to  force  them  to  return 
to  a  state  of  servitude,  contrary  to  the  principles  of  justice,  and  to  their  own 
solemn  promise"  thus  backing  up  this  bad  faith  with  very  bad  falsehoods.  As  "  many 
persons"  were  here  concerned,  it  would  be  strange  if  some  of  the  "first  families'11  were 
not  involved.  But  the  Legislature  enacted  that  all  such  persons  "  shall,  from  and  after 
the  passing  of  this  act,  be  fully  and  completely  emancipated,  and  shall  be  held  and 
deemed  free,  in  as  full  and  ample  a  manner  as  if  each  and  every  of  them  were  specially 
named  in  this  act ;  and  the  Attorney-General  for  the  Commonwealth  is  hereby  requir 
ed  to  commence  an  action,  in  forma  paupet'is,  in  behalf  of  any  of  the  persons  above 
described,  who  shall,  after  the  passing  of  this  act,  be  detained  in  servitude  by  any 
person  whatsoever;"  and  the  act  directs  that  "a  jury  shall  be  irupannelled  to  assess 
the  damages  for  the  detention"  of  persons  so  declared  free.  In  Massachusetts,  many 
negroes  were  enrolled  in  the  army,  though  slavery  had  been  abolished  in  1776.  The 
Judiciary  of  that  State  held  that  the  Declaration  of  Independence  was  an  edict  of 
emancipation.  In  New  York,  the  Legislature  in  1781  provided  for  the  enlistment  of 
slaves,  and  enacted  that  any  one  "  who  shall  serve  for  the  term  of  three  years,  or 
until  regularly  disc  hurled,  shall,  immediately  after  such  service  or  discharge,  be, 
und  is  hereby  declared  to  be,  a  free  man  of  this  State."  Other  States  passed  similar 
acts. 


854  PROVIDENTIAL    DESIGNS    IN    THIS    REBELLION. 


VINDICATION    COMPLETE    AGAINST   IDLE     DECLAMATION. 

In  view  of  the  testimony  now  given,  from  a1!  the  fore 
going  sources,  can  any  thing  be  more  idle,  absurd,  and  fana 
tical,  than  the  outcry,  that  the  determination  of  the  Gov 
ernment  to  overthrow  slavery  in  the  Rebel  States,  in  order 
to  save  itself  from  destruction,  is  "  in  itself  wicked  and 
unconstitutional,"  and  a  "  conspiracy  against  the  throne 
and  empire  of  Heaven?" 

If  it  be  said  that  the  acts  of  the  Executive,  in  giving 
freedom  to  the  slaves  by  proclamation,  do  not  come  within 
the  strict  line  of  the  authorities  given,  it  is  only  necessary 
to  say,  that  we  presume  no  one  supposed  that  the  Pre 
sident  intended  to  effect  their  liberty  by  that  measure 
alone.  It  was  a  simple  notification  to  rebel  masters  of  the 
war  policy  of  the  Government ;  an  opportunity  extended 
to  return  to  loyalty  and  save  slavery,  if  they  chose;  and  a 
warning  of  the  consequences  for  continued  rebellion.  Sla 
very,  if  overthrown  in  the  Rebel  States  by  the  Government, 
will  be  subverted  by  actual  war,  under  the  laws  of  war. 
On  that  simple  point,  it  is  most  conclusively  sustained. 

SUSTAINED    AGAINST   THE    REBEL    CONGRESS. 

After  consulting  the  authorities  given,  and  among  them 
the  numerous  cases  where  our  own  Government  has  vindi 
cated  the  right  of  slaves  to  freedom,  when  taken  in  war, 
it  is  somewhat  edifying  to  read  what  the  Rebel  Congress 
say  on  this  point,  in  an  "  Address  to  the  People  of  the 
Confederate  States,"  issued  in  February,  1864.  Among 
other  things,  they  say :  "  Emancipation  of  slaves,  as  a  wise 
measure,  has  been  severely  condemned  and  denounced  by 
the  most  eminent  publicists  in  Europe  and  the  United 
States."  They  here  refer  to  the  President's  Proclamation. 
Whether  this  may  be  a  "  wise  measure,"  men  may  differ. 


SUSTAINED    AGAINST   THE   KEBEL   CONGRESS.          355 

The  rebels  declaim  against  it,  because  of  its  inhumanity; 
but  this  Address  calls  it""  a  mere  brutum  fulm&i,"  a  harm 
less  threat.  If  they  mean  to  say  that  all  these  "  publicists" 
deem  "  emancipation  of  slaves"  in  war,  an  illegal  "  meas 
ure,"  the  authorities  we  have  cited  show  how  much  such 
assertions  are  worth.  In  view  of  these  authorities,  the 
following  from  this  Address  will  be  appreciated  at  its  true 
value :  "  Disregarding  the  teachings  of  the  approved  writers 
on  international  law,  and  the  practice  and  claims  of  his 
own  Government,  in  its  purer  days,  President  Lincoln 
has  sought  to  convert  the  South  into  a  Sain..*  Domingo, 
by  appealing  to  the  cupidity,  lusts,  ambition,  r,nd  ferocity 
of  the  slave."  And  all  this  is  to  occur  from  "  »  mere  bru- 
tumfulmen!" 

In  this  Address,  the  Rebel  Congress  endeavor  to  press 
into  the  service  the  instance  we  have  previously  referred 
to,  as  an  exception, — where  our  Government  say  that  "the 
emancipation  of  enemy's  slaves  is  not  among  the  acts  of 
legitimate  warfare," — and  make  this  exception  the  rule  in 
the  case,  when,  notoriously,  it  stands  against  the  whole 
course  of  the  Government,  as  seen  in  its  whole  history. 
Mr.  Adams  admits  that  he  "prepared  the  dispatches" 
which  announced  this  doctrine,  but  that  it  was  "  against 
his  judgment  and  wishes."  The  real  wonder  is,  that,  with 
the  General  Government,  as  Mr.  A.  H.  Stephens  says,  for 
sixty-four  years  out  of  seventy-two,  under  Southern  control, 
there  should  not  have  been  found  more  such  doctrine 
taught  and  practised  upon.  But  as  "  one  swallow  does 
not  make  a  summer,"  so  one  such  case  does  not  make  a 
rule  of  law,  nor  even  a  precedent.  The  whole  current  of 
the  testimony  of  the  United  States  is  the  other  way,  in 
actual  cases  determined  ;  and  that  of  other  nations  is  the 
same;  and  the  whole  combined  is  to  this  effect :  that,  by 
the  laws  of  war,  as  recognized  by  the  practice  of  the  most 


356  PROVIDENTIAL    DESIGNS    IN    THE    REBELLION. 

renowned  nations  of  the  present  day,  it  is  perfectly  legi 
timate  for  a  nation  at  war  to  emancipate  an  enemy's  slaves 
and  use  them  against  him ;  and  that  the  proper  status  of 
such  slaves,  so  emancipated,  is  perpetual  freedom. 

SUSTAINED    BY    SOUTHERN   MEN. 

To  save  the  Government,  this  doom  of  slavery, — not 
only  in  the  rebel  but  in  the  loyal  States, — is  called  for  by 
Southern  men,  when  the  issue  is  fairly  made  between  the 
destruction  of  the  Government  and  the  destruction  of 
slavery ;  and  that  man  has  no  claim  to  loyalty,  who  can 
hesitate  when  such  an  issue  is  joined.  Observe  a  few  de 
clarations  to  this  effect  among  a  thousand,  equally  pointed 
and  satisfactory. 

Governor  Bramlette,  of  Kentucky,  in  his  "  Gait  House 
Letter,"  dated  "Frankfort,  7th  November,  1863,"  says  : 

Is  it  not  better,  should  such  issue  be  forced,  that  we  preserve  our 
nationality,  even  with  loss  of  slavery,  than  lose  both  our  nationality 
and  slave  property?  It  is  certain  that  we,  at  least,  in  Kentucky,  can 
never  hold  slave  property,  when  this  Government  is  broken  up. 

Hon.  Green  Clay  Smith,  of  Kentucky,  in  a  speech  in  the 
House  of  Representatives,  at  Washington,  in  January  last, 
said : 

Having  witnessed  for  the  last  two  years  or  more  the  operations  of 
the  armies  of  the  country,  and,  to  some  extent,  the  effect  of  ordnance 
and  small  arms  upon  the  enemy,  I  feel  it  to  be  my  duty  upon  this  occa 
sion  to  say,  that  while  there  is  power  in  these,  and  while  the  Govern 
ment  must,  through  these,  execute  its  laws  and  vindicate  its  integrity, 
then  remains  behind  this  rebellion  that  which  gives  it  strength  and  power 
which  must  be  overthrown  and  destroyed  on  the  other  side,  while  our 
armies  and  our  ordnance  move  in  front.  *  *  *  Their  forces  in  arms 
against  the  Government  are  maintained  and  fed  by,  and  their  very  life- 
blood  is  drawn  from,  African  slavery  in  the  South.  *  *  *  Whenever 
you  sap  the  foundation  of  this  accursed  rebellion,  and  tear  from  under 


SUSTAINED    BY    SOUTHERN    MEX.  357 

the  rebels  that  which  has  given  them  strength  and  power,  you  destroy 
the  rebellion,  and  your  artillery  is  effectual.  *  *  *  When  a  man 
has  evinced  a  hatred  to  this  Government,  when  he  has  voluntarily, 
taken  up  arms  against  this  Government,  and  when  he  has  brought  his 
artillery  to  play  upon  its  Constitution  and  its  principles  and  its  liberties, 
he  can  demand  of  me,  as  a  legislator  for  the  people  of  this  country,  no 
privileges  in  horses,  cattle,  land,  or  negroes.  We  will  take  them,  when 
we  come  to  them,  by  any  means  we  can,  and  by  all  means.  The 
bulwark  which  prevented  the  American  people,  by  its  army,  from 
moving  down  to  the  South  and  exercising  jurisdiction  there, — that  bul 
wark  supported  by  four  million  slaves, — must  be  removed;  and  the  evi 
dence  that  we  have  a  right  to  remove  it  is,  that  we  have  a  right  to  crush 
tJie  rebellion.  It  is  the  duty  of  the  Government  to  do  it.  The  Government 
would  have  failed  in  its  duty  to  itself,  and  to  all  future  generations,  if 
it  did  not,  in  its  power  and  majesty,  sweep  away  that  bulwark  of  slavery. 
I  thought  it  my  duty,  under  the  circumstances  in  which  I  am  placed, 
coming  from  the  country  I  come  from,  representing  the  loyal  people  who 
feel  as  I  do,  and  whose  opinions  have  been  expressed  time  and  again  to  me, 
as  mine  to  them,  to  make  this  statement. ' 

Mr.  Lowiy,  a  member  of  the  Kentucky  Legislature, 
during  the  last  session,  said,  in  a  speech  before  that  body: 

If  the  protest  against  them  meant  on  account  of  slavery,  all  I  have 
to  say  is,  that  no  man  felt  more  sorry  than  I,  when  the  first  gun  was 
fired  on  Sumter.  That  was  the  death-knell  of  slavery  on  this  continent, 
and  1  am  not  going  at  this  late  day  to  bring  about  any  antagonism  with 
the  Government  on  account  of  it.  1  want  to  see  the  Union  man  who 
will  do  so.  I  want  to  see  the  Union  man  who  wants  to  hurl  Kentucky 
into  the  whirlpool  of  rebellion  on  account  of  the  thing.  I  am  not  will 
ing  to  do  a  single  thing  to  place  Kentucky  in  the  same  situation  as  Ten 
nessee  and  other  Southern  States,  for  the  sake  of  saving  slavery,  arid  I 
do  not  believe  that  there  is  a  patriotic  man  in  Kentucky  that  would. 

Hon.  E.  W.  Gantt,  of  Arkansas,  in  a  speech  in  Brook 
lyn,  New  York,  said : 

He  defied  any  man  to  show  him  any  cause  for  this  war  other  than 
negro  slavery.  Negro  slavery  had  deluged  the  land  in  blood  and  draped 
it  in  mourning,  and  now,  when  the  Government  in  its  might  thrust  the 


358          PKOVIDENTIAL    DESIGNS    IN    THE    REBELLION. 

institution  from  it,  politicians  would  stick  it  back  into  the  heart  of  the 
Government,  that  new  desolations  might  spring  from  it,  but  they  could 
not  do  it.  The  people  of  the  South,  the  Union  men  there,  were  determined, 
by  the  help  of  God,  to  purge  the  body  politic  of  negro  slavery,  and  let  the 
Government  stand. 

Governor  Hamilton,  in  his  Address  to  the  people  of 
Texas,  says  : 

If,  then,  you  believe,  as  I  do,  that  the  institution  of  slavery  has 
merited  and  invited  its  own  destruction,  and  that  its  doom,  pronounced 
by  the  sovereign  power  of  the  nation,  is  an  act  of  justice, — more  than 
human  justice,  attesting  the  presence  of  that  Omnipotent  Hand, — then 
speak  and  act  as  men  who  deserve  freedom  for  themselves  and  their 
posterity.  The  day  is  near  at  hand  when  the  name  of  Abolitionist  will 
cease  to  be  a  reproach,  even  in  the  South,  and  when  children,  now  daily 
the  subjeets  of  attempted  insult  on  account  of  its  application  to  their 
fathers,  will  thank  God  that  they  were  so  reviled. 

The  position  of  Dr.  Robert  J.  Breciknridge,  of  Ken 
tucky,  on  the  issues  before  the  country,  is  well  known. 
In  an  elaborate  paper  published  in  the  Danville  Quarterly 
Review  for  December,  1862,  in  which  he  dissents  from  the 
President's  Emancipation  policy,  as  foreshadowed  in  his 
Proclamation  of  the  previous  September,  he  thus  speaks 
incidentally  upon  the  simple  issue  between  slavery  and  the 
Government : 

"We  admit, — nay,  we  assert, — that  it  is  inconsistent  with  the  honor  and 
dignity  of  the  nation,  that  slaves  once  accepted  and  used  in  its  military 
service,  or  given  the  protection  of  its  flag,  should  afterwards  be  returned 
to  slavery.  *  *  *  We  believe  that  this  civil  war  will  probably,  in 
a  legitimate  prosecution  of  it,  greatly  weaken  the  political  power  of  the 
slave  States,  relatively  considered ;  that  it  will  demoralize  the  institu 
tion  of  slavery  to  a  fearful  extent ;  and  that  results  from  it  may  be 
reached  concerning  slavery,  in  opposite  directions,  far  beyond  our  ability 
to  foresee.  And,  finally,  we  do  not  believe  that  the  existence  of  slavery 
is  so  serious  an  obstacle  to  our  triumph,  as  to  justify  any  apprehension, 
or  any  resort  to  unusual  or  illegal  acts;  while,  on  the  other  hand,  its  total 


SUSTAINED    BY    SOUTHERN    MEN.  359 

destruction,  in  the  due,  vigorous,  and  legal  prosecution  of  the  war,  ought  not 
to  hinder  us  from  putting  tl\A  doctrine  and  practice  of  secession  forever  at 
rest. 

In  the  Kentucky  State,  Convention,  at  Louisville,  May 
25,  1864,  Dr.  Breckinridge  is  reported  as  saying: 

I  received,  the  other  day,  a  letter  from  my  old  friend,  Reverdy  John 
son,  of  Baltimore,  who  has  made  a  speech  [in  the  United  States  Senate] 
in  favor  of  amending  the  Constitution,  lie  asked  me  to  write  what  I 
thought  about  it,  and  I  will  give  you  the  substance  of  my  reply :  "  Taking 
the  posture  of  the  negro  question  as  it  is,  and  the  nation  as  it  is,  my 
conclusion  is,  that  the  Government  of  the  United  States  is  absolutely 
bound,  by  every  consideration  of  statesmanship  and  of  safety,  to  do  one 
of  two  things:  It  is  bound  to  use  its  whole  power,  both  of  war  and  of 
peace,  to  put  back  the  negro,-  as  far  as  possible,  into  the  condition  he 
occupied  before  the  war ;  or  it  is  bound  to  exterminate  the  whole  institution, 
by  all  the  powers  the  Constitution  gives  it,  or  that  can  be  obtained  by  an 
amendment  of  that  instrument.  If  I  were  a  pro-slavery  man,  I  would  say : 
Put  back  the  negro  to  his  former  position.  But,  as  lam  an  antislavery 
man,  I  say,  USE  THE  WHOLE  POWER  OF  THE  GOVERNMENT  TO  EXTINGUISH 

THE  INSTITUTION  OF  SLAVERY,  ROOT  AND  BRANCH. 

Dr.  Breckinridge  again  expressed  similar  sentiments, 
on  taking  his  seat  as  President  of  the  National  Union 
Convention,  which  assembled  in  Baltimore  on  the  7th 
June,  1864.  He  is  reported  as  then  saying  as  follows  : 

I  do  not  know  that  I  would  be  willing  to  go  so  far  as  probably  the  ex 
cellent  chairman  of  the  National  Committee  would.  But  I  cordially  agree 
with  him  in  this :  I  think,  considering  what  has  been  done  about  sla 
very,  taking  the  thing  as  it  now  stands,  overlooking  altogether,  either  in 
the  way  of  condemnation  or  in  the  way  of  approval,  any  act  that  has 
brought  us  to  the  point  where  we  are,  but  believing  in  my  conscience 
and  with  all  my  heart,  that  what  has  brought  us  where  we  are  in  the 
matter  of  slavery,  is  the  original  sin  and  folly  of  treason  and  secession, 
— because  you  remember  that  the  Chicago  Convention  itself  was  under 
stood  to  say,  and  I  believe  it  virtually  did  explicitly  say,  that  they  would 
not  touch  slavery  in  the  States; — leaving  it  therefore  altogether  out  of 
the  question  how  we  camo  whore  \vo  are,  on  that  particular  point,  wo 


3GO         PKOVIDENTIAL   DESIGNS   IN   THE    REBELLION. 

are  prepared  to  go  farther  than  the  original  Republicans  were  prepared 
to  go.  We  are  prepared  to  demand  not  only  that  the  whole  territory 
of  the  United  States  shall  not  be  made  slave,  but  that  the  General  Gov 
ernment  of  the  American  people  shall  do  one  of  two  things, — and  it 
appears  to  me  that  there  is  nothing  else  that  can  be  done, — either  to 
use  the  whole  power  of  the  Government,  both  the  war  power  and  the 
peace  power,  to  put  slavery  as  nearly  as  possible  back  where  it  was, — 
for,  although  that  would  be  a  fearful  state  of  society,  it  is  better  than 
anarchy ;  or  else,  to  use.  the  whole  power  of  the  Government,  both  of  war 
and  peace,  and  all  the  practical  power  that  the  people  of  the  United  States 
will  give  them,  TO  EXTERMINATE  AND  EXTINGUISH  SLAVERY.  I  have  no 
hesitation  in  saying  for  myself,  that  if  I  were  a  proslavery  man,  if  I 
believed  this  institution  was  an  ordinance  of  God,  and  was  given  to 
man,  I  would  unhesitatingly  join  those  who  demand  that  the  Govern 
ment  should  be  put  back  where  it  was.  But  I  am  not  a  proslavery 
man — I  never  was ;  I  unite  myself  with  those  who  believe  that  it  is 
contrary  to  the  highest  interests  of  all  men  and  of  all  Government,  con 
trary  to  the  spirit  of  the  Christian  religion,  and  incompatible  with  the 
natural  rights  of  man ;  I  join  myself  with  those  who  say,  Away  with  it 
forever:  and  I  fervently  pray  God  that  the  day  may  come,  when, 
throughout  tho  whole  land,  every  man  may  be  as  free  as  you  are,  and 
as  capable  of  eajoying  regulated  liberty. 

Such  are  the  sentiments  of  leading  men  in  the  Border 
and  more  Southern  Slave  States.  They  believe  the  time 
fully  come  when  that  institution  which  underlies  the  strife 
now  raging  throughout  this  nation,  should  cease  in  the 
land  forever.  This,  we  doubt  not,  will  be  found  to  be  a 
sentiment  which  will  extend,  as  the  war  goes  on,  to 
the  entire  people,  so  far  as  they  are  truly  loyal  to  their 
country. 

THE    SUM    OF    PROVIDENTIAL    INDICATIONS. 

We  have  now  given  a  bare  summary  of  the  reasons 
which  lead  us  to  the  conclusion,  that  it  is  the  design  of 
God,  in  His  providence,  to  make  use  of  the  rebellion  to 
terminate  forever  the  insdtution  of  slavery  in  the  United 
States,  and  thus  cause  the  wrath  of  man  to  praise  Him. 


THE    SUM    OP    PROVIDENTIAL    INDICATIONS.  361 

We  have  already  said  that  considerable  time  may  elapse 
before  the  end  is  reached ;  that  it  may  be,  not  till  some 
subsequent  Congress  shall  take  that  necessary  step  for  an 
amendment  of  the  Constitution,  which,  when  ratified  by 
the  people,  will  give  the  finishing  stroke  to  the  work ; 
and  that  then  it  may  require,  for  a  time,  a  military  force 
to  make  even  that  measure  practically  effective.  But  that 
that  end  will  be  reached  before  we  can  have  permanent 
peace,  we  believe  to  be  as  certain  as  that  God  reigns. 

It  is  said  that  revolutions  never  go  backwards.  The 
truth  of  the  aphorism  depends  on  its  application.  The 
South  apply  it  to  the  treasonable  work  in  which  they  are 
engaged,  and  faith  in  the.  sentiment  nerves  their  courage. 
It  is,  however,  our  own  conviction,  that  that  revolution  will 
be  rolled  back  and  entirely  fail.  But  another  revolution 
is  in  progress  among  the  loyal  people.  The  change  in 
their  sentiments  regarding  slavery,  in  some  of  the  develop 
ments  made  since  the  rebellion  began,  is  remarkable.  The 
advance  which  has  been  made  by  the  Government  respect 
ing  the  institution,  beginning  with  what  it  was  at  first 
supposed  the  Government  might  and  might  not  do  with 
it,  of  right,  in  putting  down  the  rebellion;  proceeding  to 
what  seemed  to  be  a  necessity,  and  carrying  out  its 
intentions  by  Congressional  and  Executive  acts,  and  by 
military  orders  and  power  ;  the  sentiments  of  the  people, 
at  first  of  such  a  character  as  probably  would  have  pro- 
duoed  a  revolut  ion  at  the  North,  if  certain  steps  had  been 
taken  earlier ;  their  present  approval  or  acquiescence ;  the 
extensive  belief  that  the  destruction  of  slavery  is  now  a 
necessity  of  our  national  existence,  on  a  basis  of  perma 
nent  peace ;  the  remarkable  change  in  the  Border  States, 
not  only  among  leading  individuals,  but  among  the  people, 
as  evinced  in  the  voluntary  action  of  these  States,  looking 
to  the  speedy  removal  of  Slavery ;  the  legislation  of  Con- 


362          PROVIDENTIAL    DESIGNS    IX    THE    REBELLION. 

gress,  bearing  upon  its  termination,  to  the  whole  extent 
to  which  it  has  direct  civil  jurisdiction  ;  these, — every  one 
of  which  has  grown  out  of  the  rebellion, — are  among  the 
well-known  indications  of  a  revolution  in  the  ideas  of  the 
Government  and  people.  Considering  the  mere  lapse  of 
time,  the  extent  of  this  change  is  remarkable;  though, 
under  the  causes  which  have  impelled  it,  the  change  is 
natural.  This  is  one  of  those  revolutions  which  we  believe 
will  not  go  backwu.  ds.  It  is  one  of  those  mighty  movings 
in  the  hearts  of  a  great  people,  in  the  right  direction, 
which  will  have  no  rest  until  its  glorious  and  ultimate 
goal  shall  be  reached. 

How  can  any  believer  in  God's  providence,  which  extends 
to  all  things, — in  whose  hand  are  the  hearts  of  all  people, 
— fail  to  see  in  these  events  the  inevitable  designs  of  God? 
How  can  he  fail  to  read  in  them  the  doom  of  slavery  ? 

We  had  intended  to  consider  other  designs  of  God's 
providence  in  the  rebellion,  but  the  extent  of  this  chapter 
compels  us  to  desist.  If  slavery  is  purged  from  the  land, 
the  only  serious  element  of  our  national  strife  is  removed. 
"We  can  then  become  a  homogeneous  and  truly  united 
people.  It  may  take  time  to  remove  the  alienation  and 
bitterness  which  the  war  has  engendered,  but  the  great 
cause  being  extinct,* we  may  at  length  become  ONE  in  a 
sense  otherwise  impossible  of  attainment.  Then,  by  the 
favor  of  God,  we  may  have  before  us  a  career  of  true 
prosperity;  then,  our  land  "may  indeed  be  the  asylum  for 
the  oppressed  of  all  lands ;  then,  as  a  people,  we  may  be 
prepared  to  fulfil  our  mission  to  the  world !  May  God 
speed  the  day — and  to  Him  be  the  glory ! 


THREE   PERIODS    OF    OPINION   HISTORICALLY.  363 

CHAPTER  X. 

THE   CHUECH  AND   SLAVERY. 

THE  relation  of  the  Church  of  God  in  the  United  Statt^ 
to  American  slavery  as  an  institution,  and  the  sentiments 
of  ecclesiastical  bodies  and  lending  divines  upon  its  charac 
ter,  as  entertained  formerly  and  at  the  present  time  in 
different  sections  of  the  country,  and  the  bearing  of  the 
whole  upon  the  rebellion,  are  matters  of  vast  moment. 
Some  of  these  things  have  a  connection  as  cause  and 
effect,  either  directly  and  immediately  or  more  or  less 
remotely,  which  it  may  be  interesting  and  instructive  to 
trace. 

The  subject  naturally  presents  itself  under  three  aspects  : 
the  sentiments  which  generally  prevailed  in  the  early 
period  and  during  the  greater  portion  of  our  history,  both 
North  and  South ;  their  subsequent  modification  at  the 
North,  and  total  revolution  in  almost  the  whole  of  the 
extreme  South  ;  and  the  general  state  of  the  public  mind 
at  present  in  both  sections,  consequent  upon  the  rebellion. 
We  do  not  propose  in  this  chapter  to  go  over  the  ground 
presented  in  each  of  these  periods,  but  it  is  well  to  note 
the  fact  in  this  place  which  a  full  examination  would  verify, 
that  a  survey  of  the  whole  field  properly  presents  the  sub 
ject  under  this  three-fold  aspect. 

THREE    PERIODS    OF    OPINION    HISTORICALLY. 

The  first  of  these  periods,  though  not  separated  from  the 
second  so  palpably  that  its  termination  can  be  fixed  at  a 
precise  point  of  time,  begins  at  a  very  early  day  or  near 
the  dawn  of  our  history  as  a  people,  and  comes  down  to 


364  THE    CHURCH    AND    SLAVERY. 

about  the  year  1835,  during  which  the  antislavery  senti 
ment  was  generally  prevalent.  That  the  common  opinion 
of  the  whole  country  in  the  early  days  of  the  Republic, 
both  before  and  after  the  Revolution,  and  down  to  a  com 
paratively  recent  day,  was  against  the  institution  on  grounds 
of  policy  and  principle,  is  undeniable.  Statesmen,  divines, 
ecclesiastical  bodies,  the  people  at  large,  both  North  and 
So;ith,  with  rare  exceptions,  regarded  slavery  as  founded  in 
wrong,  condemned  it  as  an  institution,  and  desired  and 
expected,  and  to  some  extent  labored  for,  its  removal. 
These  are  propositions  so  clear  and  certain,  and  so  well 
known  to  all  men,  that  it  is  superfluous  to  attempt  to  add 
any  thing  to  make  the  case  plainer. 

It  is  equally  true  and  well  known,  illustrating  a  second 
period  of  opinion,  that  a  change  occurred  in  the  South, 
beginning  indeed  before,  but  becoming  more  marked  at 
about  the  time  indicated,  and  finally  developing  into  the 
sentiment  of  sanctioning  slavery  in  the  highest  and  fullest 
sense,  and  on  every  ground,  social,  economical,  political, 
moral  and  religious ;  and  that,  during  this  same  period, 
while  a  small  fraction  of  the  Northern  people,  the  "  aboli 
tionists  proper,"  as  they  have  been  termed,  took  extreme, 
and,  to  the  South,  offensive  ground  and  action,  and  while 
another  portion  maintained  the  original  antislavery  senti 
ments  which  prevailed  from  the  first,  still  another  and  a 
very  large  portion  of  the  Northern  people,  embracing 
m-iny  who  were  still  not  friendly  to  slavery,  practically 
abandoned  the  early  prevalent  sentiments,  became  intensely 
"  conservative,"  and  took  such  a  course  of  action,  illus 
trated  by  the  writings  and  speeches  of  men  both  in  Church 
and  State,  ns  gave  the  modern  Southern  views  a  direct 
and  intended,  or  a  <??<<m-practical  sanction  and  encourage 
ment.  These  phases  of  sentiment,  and  their  consequences, 
are  susceptible  of  the  clearest  proof. 


THREE    PERIODS    OF    OPINION    HISTORICALLY.          305 

The  third  period  dates  from  thy  beginning  of  the  rebel 
lion.  In  the  South  we  see  no  special  change  among  the 
rebels  concerning  slavery,  except  a  reiteration  of  their 
former  arguments  in  its  favor  more  vehemently,  and  their 
determination,  if  possible,  to  make  good  by  the  sword 
what  they  have  failed  to  do  by  rhetoric.  But  among  loyal 
men  at  the  South,  as  our  arms  advance,  the  most  marked 
changes  in  sentiment  appear.  They  denounce  slavery  as 
the  cause  of  all  their  woes,  and  some  of  them  outstrip 
Abolition  itself  in  heaping  upon  it  their  anathemas  as  a 
wicked  and  monstrous  institution,  now  that  they  see  what 
use  has  bei-n  made  of  it  by  demagogues.  This  is  a  little 
remarkable  for  serious  men,  as  in  principle  it  has  always 
been  just  what  it  now  is.  But  men's  views  of  moral 
questions  are  often  affected  by  matters  which  really  have 
nothing  to  do  with  their  moral  status  and  relations,  or 
which  concern  them  only  incidentally.  And  this  ethical 
feature  of  the  case  is  illustrated  quite  as  strikingly  at  the 
North.  The  views  of  the  institution  which  many  now 
entertain  arise  mainly  or  wholly  from  what  the  rebellion 
has  developed,  while  its  character  as  a  system  is  unchanged. 
There  have  been  substantially  but  two  classes  among  the 
Northern  people  since  the  rebellion  began.  Those  who 
in  heart  were  antislavery,  but  in  action  conservative,  are 
now  united  with  all  those  who  have  opposed  the  system 
in  any  form,  in  two  things :  agreeing  that  slavery  has 
caused  the  rebellion  and  the  war;  and  that  its  just  doom 
is  to  perish.  They  regard  it  an  evil  in  a  sense,  and  put 
themselves  in  opposition  to  it  in  a  form,  to  which  they 
have  been  brought,  not  by  the  character  of  the  institution 
itself,  but  by  what  it  has  attempted ;  and  looking  at  it 
now  from  a  new  stand-point,  some  of  this  class  are  frank 
to  confess  their  former  position  wrong.  The  other  phase 
of  sentiment  in  the  loyal  States  is  substantially  one  with 


866  THE    CHURCH    AND    SLAVERY. 

that  of  the  rebels.  It  is  seen  in  Church  and  State.  There 
is  a  class  of  men  in  the  Church  in  the  loyal  States  who 
take  the  same  ground  for  slavery  as  do  the  rebels,  defend 
ing  it  as  divine,  and  desiring  it  to  be  perpetual.  They  of 
course,  like  a  certain  class  of  politicians,  are  arrayed 
against  the  Government.  They  are  opposed  to  putting 
down  the  rebellion  by  force  of  arms,  or  in  any  other  way. 
They  are  in  sympathy  with  the  rebels  concerning  the 
institution  which  caused  the  war,  and  they  are  therefore 
against  the  war  and  for  the  perpetuity  of  slavery.  These 
phases  of  present  Northern  sentiment, — or  rather,  senti 
ment  in  all  the  loyal  States, — illustrate  and  confirm  the 
declaration  of  the  Hon.  Green  Clay  Smith,  of  Kentucky, 
in  the  resolutions  offered  by  him  and  passed  by  the 
present  House  of  Representatives,  that  "  there  are  now 
but  two  classes  in  the  country — patriots  and  traitors." 

We  have  already  said  that  we  cannot  go  over  the 
ground  covered  by  these  three  periods,  so  as  to  exhibit  hi 
full  the  evidence  of  these  several  phases  of  opinion  upon 
•slavery.  We  shall,  in  this  chapter,  confine  our  examina 
tion  to  the  first  two  periods,  and  of  these  we  can  take 
but  a  cursory  view,  reserving  to  a  subsequent  chapter, 
entirely,  a  notice  of  modern  Southern  opinion.  Our 
design  will  lead  to  a  summary  sketch  of  the  state  of 
opinion  from  early  times  to  the  present  day,  simply  to 
show,  in  the  result,  how  it  illustrates  the  working  out  of 
the  rebellion.  We  shall  look  chiefly  at  the  state  of  senti 
ment  in  the  Church,  though  it  will  be  found  that  this 
corresponds  with  that  entertained  by  the  people  generally. 

THE    CHURCH    LARGELY    RESPONSIBLE    FOR    OPINION. 

It  is  undoubtedly  true  that  the  more  intelligent  classes 
in  society — statesmen  and  others  of  the  highest  abilities, 
who  are  not  connected  formally  with  the  Church,  as  well 


THE    CHURCH    RESPONSIBLE    FOR    OPINION.  367 

as  the  mass  of  her  members, — have  their  opinions  formed 
or  modified,  in  a  good  degree,  upon  the  moral  and  religious 
aspects  of  this  and  many  other  questions,  by  the  views 
which  the  Church  takes  ;  by  the  formal  action  of  its  eccle 
siastical  assemblies  ;  by  the  writings  of  its  distinguished 
ministers,  and  by  the  discussions  of  the  pulpit.  This, 
to  a  great  extent,  is  no  doubt  true  of  the  general  opposi 
tion  felt  toward  slavery  in  the  early  period  of  our  history ; 
to  that  opposition  as  moderated  or  intensified  at  a  later 
period ;  and  to  the  total  change  in  sentiment  upon  the 
character  of  slavery  which  occurred  among  the  people  of 
the  extreme  South.  It  will  thus  be  seen,  in  so  far  as  this 
agency  in  forming  men's  opinions  is  justly  attributable  to 
the  Church,  as  illustrated  in  the  views  which  the  American 
people  have  entertained  concerning  slavery,  that  the  re 
sponsibility  of  the  Church  in  this  regard  is  overwhelmingly 
great ;  and  if  it  shall  appear  that  the  Church  led  the  way, 
statesmen  but  following  in  her  wake,  in  the  change  of 
Southern  opinion  upon  the  character  of  slavery  (proof 
of  which  will  be  given  in  another  chapter),  and  which 
culminated  in  the  rebellion,  it  will  furnish  an  additional 
item  of  the  most  momentous  importance  in  fixing  upon 
those  who  thus  took  the  initiative,  the  tremendous 
burden  of  that  tide  of  blood  which  is  now  rolling  over 
the  land. 

We  record  the  facts  which  bear  upon  such  a  result 
with  no  satisfaction ;  rather  with  mortification  and  sor 
row.  But  if  they  are  a  part  of  the  veritable  history  of 
these  "  perilous  times,"  if  they  illustrate  a  most  important 
phase  in  a  great  moral  movement  of  the  age,  directed  by 
the  providence  of  God,  though  it  be  in  violence  and  car 
nage,  through  the  agency  of  his  own  Church,  it  may  prove 
a  valuable  lesson  to  her  and  to  all  men,  and  stand  as  a 
beacon  to  warn  and  to  guide  in  days  yet  to  come. 


368  THE    CHURCH    AND    SLAVERY. 


PRESBYTERIAN    CHURCH    ILLUSTRATIVE    OF    OTHERS. 

To  avoid  prolixity,  we  shall  not  collate  the  sentiments 
upon  slavery  of  the  several  branches  of  the  Church.  The 
views  published  from  time  to  time  by  the  Presbyterian 
Church  will  probably  show  the  opinions  substantially  of 
the  Churches  of  all  denominations  in  the  country, — at 
least  for  the  first  period,  and  to  a  great  extent  for  the 
second, — as  explicitly  as  any  other  testimony.  It  was 
formerly  among  the  largest  in  the  United  States,  and 
extended  into  all  parts  of  the  country.  It  was  divided 
into  nearly  equal  portions  in  1838,  not  upon  any  geo 
graphical  line,  nor  upon  the  subject  of  slavery.  Both 
branches,  commonly  known,  after  the  separation,  as  Old 
and  New  School,  were  still  spread  over  the  whole  country, 
and  had  each  its  General  Assembly,  in  which  the  entire 
body  of  each  respectively  was  represented. 

In  1857,  a  schism  occurred  in  the  New  School  Church, 
purely  upon  slavery,  by  a  large  portion  of  the  delegates 
from  the  South  voluntarily  withdrawing,  and  the  Churches 
they  represented  subsequently  forming  a  separate  organi 
zation.  The  New  School  Church,  however,  continued  to 
embrace  Churches  in  the  Border  slave  Slates,  and  its  juris 
diction  still  extends  there. 

The  Old  School  Church  maintained  its  jurisdiction 
intact  down  to  the  time  of  the  rebellion.  Its  highest 
judicatory,  assembling  annually,  might  then  have  been 
composed  of  commissioners  from  every  State  in  the  Union 
except  Vermont  and  Rhode  Island.  When  the  rebellion 
occurred,  the  Churches,  Presbyteries,  and  Synods,  in  the 
seceded  States,  cut  loose  from  the  "  General  Assembly  of 
the  United  States,"  and  formed  a  "  General  Assembly  of 
the  Confederate  States."  The  former  still  extends  its 
jurisdiction  to  the  Churches  formerly  in  its  connection 


EARLY  TESTIMONY  OF  THE  CHURCH.        369 

throughout  the  loyal  States,  while  it  has  never,  by  any 
formal  act,  renounced  its  jurisdiction  to  the  Churches  of 
the  seceded  States. 

It  is  essential  that  these  facts  should  be  borne  in  mind, 
in  order  to  understand  the  testimony  which  this  large 
body  of  Christians  has  maintained  upon  the  subject  under 
consideration. 

FIRST    PERIOD. — EARLY    TESTIMONY    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

Going  back  to  the  year  1774,  we  find  that  in  the  high 
est  judicatory  of  the  Presbyterian  Church  (then  the 
Synod  of  New  York  and  Philadelphia)  "the  subject  of 
negro  slavery  came  up  to  be  considered,"  and  that  "  much 
reasoning  on  the  matter"  occurred,  resulting  in  the 
appointment  of  a  committee  to  make  a  report;  but  no 
further  action  appears  to  have  been  taken  at  that  meeting. 
In  1787,  the  Synod  took  their  first  formal  action.  A 
committee  made  a  report,  in  which  these  words  occur : 

It  is  more  especially  the  duty  of  those  who  maintain  the  rights  of 
humanity,  and  who  acknowledge  and  teach  the  obligations  of  Christi 
anity,  to  use  such  means  as  are  in  their  power  to  extend  the  blessings  of 
equal  freedom  to  every  part  of  the  human  race.  From  a  full  conviction 
of  these  truths,  and  sensible  that  the  rights  of  human  nature  are  too 
well  understood  to  admit  of  debate,  Ouertured,  That  the  Synod  of  New 
York  and  Philadelphia  recommend  in  the  warmest  terms,  to  every 
member  of  their  body,  and  to  all  the  Churches  and  families  under  their 
care,  to  do  every  thing  in  their  power,  consistent  with  the  rights  of 
civil  society,  to  promote  the  abolition  of  slavery,  and  the  instruction  of 
the  negroes,  whether  bond  or  free. 

After  full  consideration,  the  body  "  came  to  the  follow 
ing  judgment,"  which  we  give  in  part : 

The  Synod  of  Xew  York  and  Philadelphia  do  highly  approve  of  the 
general  principles  of  universal  liberty  that  prevail  in  America,  and  the 
interest  which  many  of  the  States  have  taken  in  promoting  the  abolition 
of  xUiiKry.  *  *  *  They  earnestly  recooimeml  it  to  all  the  members 


370  THE    CHURCH    AND    SLAVERY. 

belonging  to  their  communion,  to  give  those  persons  who  are  at  present 
held  in  servitude  such  good  education  as  to  prepare  them  for  the  better 
enjoyment  of  freedom,  *  *  *  [They  also  "recommend  that  masters" 
v  ould  give  their  slaves]  a  peculium,  or  grant  them  sufficient  time 
and  sufficient  means  of  procuring  their  own  liberty  at  a  moderate  rate, 
that  thereby  they  may  be  brought  into  society  with  those  habits 
of  industry  that  may  render  them  useful  citizens ;  and,  finally,  they 
recommend  it  to  all  their  people  to  use  the  most  prudent  measures, 
consistent  with  the  interest  and  the  state  of  civil  society,  in  the 
counties  where  they  live,  to  procure  eventually  the  final  abolition  of  slavery 
in  America. 

In  1793,  "this  decision  was  republished"  as  the  act 
and  judgment  of  the  General  Assembly — that  body  having 
been  formed  in  1787. 

POLITICS   AND    RELIGION. A   PROPHET. 

The  Constitution  of  the  United  States  was  submitted 
to  the  people  of  the  several  States  for  ratification  in  1787. 
Its  relations  to  slavery  were  canvassed  by  the  people  of 
all  classes,  as  they  had  been  in  the  National  and  were  in 
the  respective  State  conventions.  We  give  a  single  tes 
timony,  among  many,  showing  the  views  of  prominent 
divines. 

Rev.  Dr.  Hopkins,  of  Newport,  Rhode  Island,  wrote  to 
Rev.  Dr.  Hart,  of  Preston,  Connecticut,  on  the  subject, 
under  date  of  January  29,  1788,  as  follows  : 

The  new  Constitution,  you  observe,  guarantees  this  trade  (the  slave- 
trade)  for  twenty  years.  I  fear,  if  it  be  adopted,  this  will  prove  an 
Acha-n  in  our  camp.  How  does  it  appear  in  the  sight  of  Heaven  and 
of  all  good  men,  well  informed,  that  these  States,  who  have  been  fight 
ing  for  liberty,  and  consider  themselves  as  the  highest  and  most  noble 
example  of  zeal  for  it,  cannot  agree  in  any  political  Constitution,  unless 
it  indulge  and  authorize  them  to  enslave  their  fellow-men !  I  think  if 
this  Constitution  be  not  adopted  as  it  is,  without  any  alteration,  we 
shall  have  none,  and  shall  be  in  a  state  of  anarchy,  and  probably  of 
civil  war.  Therefore,  I  wish  to  have  it  adopted ;  but  still,  as  I  said, 
I  fear.  And  perhaps  civil  war  will  not  be  avoided,  if  it  be  adopted. 


ACTION    UPON   A   CASE    SUBMITTED.       •  371 

Verily,  among  the  "  giants  in  the  earth  in  those  Jays," 
there  were  some  prophets.  Dr.  Hopkins,  like  a  true  seer, 
"  srnelletli  the  battle  afar  off."  But  he  prophesied  further. 
The  historian  cannot  more  truly  depict  the  scenes  which 
these  latter  days  have  witnessed  in  Congress,  than  they 
are  graphically  drawn  by  that  sagacious  divine  of  nearly 
a  hundred  years  ago  : 

Ah !  these  unclean  spirits,  like  frogs, — they,  like  the  Furies  of  the 
poets,  are  spreading  discord,  and  exciting  men  to  contention  and  war, 
wherever  they  go ;  and  they  can  spoil  the  best  Constitution  that  can 
be  formed.  When  Congress  shall  be  formed  on  the  new  plan,  these 
frogs  will  be  there ;  for  they  go  forth  to  the  kings  of  the  earth,  in  the 
first  place.  They  will  turn  the  members  of  that  august  body  into 
devils,  so  far  as  they  are  permitted  to  influence  them. 

He  seems  to  have  foreseen  also,  or  at  least  feared,  what 
would  come  upon  the  Church  as  well  as  upon  the  State ; 
though  here,  the  reality  has  for  exceeded,  in  these  "  last 
times,"  the  apprehensions  expressed :  "  I  suppose  that 
even  good  Christians  are  not  out  of  the  reach  of  influence 
from  these  frogs.  c  Blessed  is  he  that  watcheth  and  keep- 
eth  his  garments.' " 

This  is  the  same  Dr.  Hopkins,  who,  in  conjunction  with 
Rev.  Dr.  Stiles,  made  "  a  representation,"  in  1774,  to  the 
Synod  of  New  York  and  Philadelphia,  which  led  to  the 
"  first  notice  of  the  subject,  the  slavery  question,"  taken 
by  the  Presbyterian  Church  in  the  United  States  in  her 
highest  court.  The  Minutes  say:  "The  representation 
and  request  relative  to  sending  negro  missionaries  to 
Africa,  was  taken  into  consideration,  in  consequence  of 
which  the  subject  of  negro  slavery  came  to  be  con 
sidered." 

ACTION    UPON    A    CASE    SUBMITTED. 

In    1795,  the   General  Assembly   of  the   Presbyterian 
Church  took  further  action  upon  an  overture  from  the 
17 


372  THE    CHURCH    AND   SLAVERY. 

Presbytery  of  Transylvania,  in  Kentucky.  The  case  was 
that  of  "  a  serious  and  conscientious  person,"  who  viewed 
"  the  slavery  of  the  negroes  as  a  moral  evil,  highly  offensive 
to  God,  and  injurious  to  the  interests  of  the  Gospel,"  and 
who  lived  among  those  "  who  concurred  with  him  in  sen 
timent  upon  general  principles,  yet  for  particular  reasons 
held  slaves,  and  tolerated  the  practice  in  others ;"  and  he 
wished  to  know  whether  he  should  "  hold  Christian  com 
munion  with  the  latter." 

The  Assembly  exhorted  the  man,  and  others  similarly 
situated,  to  "  live  in  charity  and  peace  according  to  the 
doctrine  and  practice  of  the  Apostles,"  and  adds :  "  At 
the  same  time,  the  General  Assembly  assure  all  the 
Churches  under  their  care,  that  they  view  with  the  deepest 
concern  any  vestiges  of  slavery  which  may  exist  in  our 
country,  and  refer  the  Churches  to  the  records  of  the 
General  Assembly,  published  at  different  times,"  as  given 
above. 

The  Assembly  also  address  "  a  letter  to  the  Presbytery 
on  the  subject  of  the  above  overture,"  in  which  they 
exhort  to  peace,  and  say  that  "the  commissioners  from 
the  Presbytery  of  Transylvania  are  furnished  with  attested 
copies"  of  the  Assembly's  "  decisions,  to  be  read  by  the 
Presbytery  when  it  shall  appear  to  them  proper ;"  and 
also,  that  "the  General  Assembly  have  taken  every  step 
which  they  deemed  expedient  or  wise,  to  encourage  eman 
cipation,  and  to  render  the  state  of  those  who  are  in 
slavery  as  mild  and  tolerable  as  possible." 

ANOTHER   CASE    ACTED    UPON. 

In  1815,  the  Assembly  adopted  another  paper,  founded 
upon  "  the  petition  of  some  elders  who  entertained  conscien 
tious  scruples  on  the  subject  of  holding  slaves,"  and  upon 
another  petition  from  "  the  Synod  of  Ohio  concerning  the 


THE   MOST   ELABORATE    TESTIMONY.  373 

buying  and  selling  of  slaves."     The  paper  of  the  Assembly 
contains  these  sentences : 

The  General  Assembly  have  repeatedly  declared  their  cordial  appro 
bation  of  those  principles  of  civil  liberty  which  appear  to  be  recognized 
by  the  Federal  and  State  Governments  in  these  United  States.  They 
have  expressed  their  regret  that  the  slavery  of  the  Africans,  and  of 
their  descendants,  still  continues  in  so  many  places,  and  even  among 
those  within  the  pale  of  the  Church,  and  have  urged  the  Presbyteries 
under  their  care  to  adopt  such  measures  as  will  secure  at  least  to  the 
rising  generation  of  slaves,  within  the  bounds  of  the  Church,  a  religious 
education,  that  they  may  be  prepared  for  the  exercise  and  enjoyment  of 
liberty,  when  God  in  His  providence  may  open  a  door  for  their  eman 
cipation. 

The  Assembly  then  refer  the  petitioners  to  the  previous 
action  in  1787,  1793,  and  1795. 

THE   MOST   ELABORATE   TESTIMONY. 1818. 

The  paper  adopted  by  the  General  Assembly  of  1818  is 
more  frequently  referred  to  and  perhaps  more  generally 
known  than  any  other,  as  containing  a  more  full  and 
pointed  condemnation  of  the  system  than  had  been  pre 
viously  enacted.  It  was  introduced  by  the  presentation 
of  the  following  resolution:  "Resolved,  That  a  person 
who  shall  sell  as  a  slave,  a  member  of  the  Church,  who 
shall  be  at  the  time  in  good  standing  in  the  Church  and 
unwilling  to  be  sold,  acts  inconsistently  with  the  spirit  of 
Christianity,  and  ought  to  be  debarred  from  the  commu 
nion  of  the  Church."  The  record  then  proceeds  :  "  After 
considerable  discussion,  the  subject  was  committed  to  Dr. 
Green,  Dr.  Baxter,  and  Mr.  Burgess,  to  prepare  a  report 
to  be  adopted  by  the  Assembly,  embracing  the  object  of 
the  above  resolution,  and  also  expressing  the  opinion  of 
the  Assembly  in  general  as  to  slavery."  This  committee 
made  a  report  which  the  record  says  "  was  unanimously 
adopted."  The  report  is  a  long  document,  and  although 


374  THE    CHURCH   AND    SLAVERY. 

well  known,  we  here  give  several  paragraphs,  to  show  the 
views  of  the  Assembly  upon  the  character  of  slavery  as  a 
system.  The  report  begins  as  follows  : 

"We  consider  the  voluntary  enslaving  of  one  portion  of  the  human 
race  by  another  as  a  gross  violation  of  the  most  precious  and  sacred  righ* 
of  human  nature  ;  and  as  utterly  inconsistent  with  the  law  of  God,  which 
requires  us  to  love  our  neighbor  as  ourselves,  and  as  totally  irreconcilable 
with  the  sx>irit  and  principles  of  the  Gospel  of  Christ,  which  enjoin  that 
"all  things  whatsoever  ye  would  that  men  should  do  to  you,  do  ye 
even  so  to  them."  Slavery  creates  a  paradox  in  the  moral  system;  it 
exhibits  rational,  accountable,  and  immortal  beings  in  such  circum 
stances  as  scarcely  to  leave  them  the  power  of  moral  action.  It  exhib 
its  them  as  dependent  on  the  will  of  others,  whether  they  shall  receive 
religious  instruction ;  whether  they  shall  know  and  worship  the  true 
God  :  whether  they  shall  enjoy  the  ordinances  of  the  Gospel ;  whether 
they  shall  perform  the  duties  and  cherish  the  endearments  of  husbands 
and  wives,  parents  and  children,  neighbors  and  friends  ;  whether  they 
shah1  preserve  their  chastity  and  purity,  or  regard  the  dictates  of  justice 
and  humanity.  Such  are  some  of  the  consequences  of  slavery — con 
sequences  not  imaginary,  but  which  connect  themselves  with  its  very  exist 
ence.  The  evils  to  which  the  slave  is  always  exposed,  often  take  place 
in  fact,  and  in  their  very  worst  degree  and  form;  and  where  ah1  of  them 
do  not  take  place,  as  we  rejoice  to  say  in  many  instances,  through  the 
influence  of  the  principles  of  humanity  and  religion  on  the  mind  of 
masters,  they  do  no.t, — still  the  slave  is  deprived  of  his  natural  right, 
degraded  as  a  human  being,  and  exposed  to  the  danger  of  passing  into 
the  hands  of  a  master  who  may  inflict  upon  him  all  the  hardships  and 
injuries  which  inhumanity  and  avarice  may  suggest. 

From  this  view  of  the  consequences  resulting  from  the  practice  into 
which  Christian  people  have  most  inconsistently  fallen,  of  enslaving  a  portion 
of  their  brethren  of  mankind, — for  "God  hath  made  of  one  blood  all 
nations  of  men  to  dwell  on  the  face  of  the  earth," — it  is  manifestly  tlie 
duty  of  all  Christians  who  enjoy  the  light  of  the  present  day,  when  the 
inconsistency  of  slavery,  both  with  the  dictates  of  humanity  and  religion,  has 
been  demonstrated,  and  is  generally  seen  and  acknowledged^  to  use  their 
honest,  earnest,  and  unwearied  endeavors,  to  correct  the  errors  of  former 
times,  and  as  speedily  as  possible  to  efface  this  blot  on  our  holy  religion,  and 
to  obtain  the  complete  abolition  of  slavery  throughout  Christendom,  and  if 
possible  throughout  the  world. 


THE   MOST    ELABOEATE   TESTIMONY.  375 

We  rejoice  that  the  Church  to  which  we  belong  commenced  as  early  as 
any  other  in  this  country,  the  good  work  of  endeavoring  to  put  an  end  to 
slavery,  and  that  in  the  same  work  many  of  its  members  have  ever  since 
been,  and  now  are,  among  the  most  active,  vigorous,  and  efficient  laborers. 
We  do,  indeed,  tenderly  sympathize  with  those  portions  of  our  Church 
and  of  our  country  where  the  evil  of  slavery  has  been  entailed  upon 
them;  where  a  great  and  the  most  virtuous  part  of  the  community  abhor 
slavery,  and  wish  its  extermination  as  sincerely  as  any  others — but  where 
the  number  of  slaves,  their  ignorance,  and  their  vicious  habits  generally, 
render  an  immediate  and  universal  emancipation  inconsistent  alike  with 
the  safety  and  happiness  of  the  master  and  the  slave.  With  those  who  are 
thus  circumstanced,  we  repeat  that  we  tenderly  sympathize.  At  the  same 
time  we  earnestly  exhort  them  to  continue,  and  if  possible  to  increase  their 
exertions  to  effect  a  total  abolition  of  slavery.  We  exhort  them  to  suffer  no 
greater  delay  to  take  place  in  this  most  interesting  concern,  than  a 
regard  to  the  public  welfare  truly  and  indispensably  demands. 

As  our  country  has  inflicted  a  most  grievous  injury  upon  the  unhappy 
Africans,.by  bringing  them  into  slavery,  we  cannot  indeed  urge  that  we 
should  add  a  second  injury  to  the  first,  by  emancipating  them  in  such 
manner  as  that  they  will  be  likely  to  destroy  themselves  or  others.  But 
we  do  think  that  our  country  ought  to  be  governed  in  this  matter  by 
no  other  consideration  than  an  honest  and  impartial  regard  to  the  happi 
ness  of  the  injured  party,  uninfluenced  by  the  expense  or  inconvenience  which 
such  a  regard  may  involve.  We,  therefore,  warn  all  who  belong  to  our 
denomination  of  Christians,  against  unduly  extending  this  plea  of  necessity ; 
against  making  it  a  cover  for  the  love  and  practice  of  slavery,  or  a  pre 
tence  for  not  using  efforts  that  are  lawful  and  practicable  to  extinguish 
this  evil.  And  we,  at  the  same  time,  exhort  others  to  forbear  harsh-cen 
sures,  and  uncharitable  reflections  on  their  brethren,  who  unhappily 
live  among  slaves  whom  they  cannot  immediately  set  free  ;  but  who,  at 
the  same  time,  are  really  using  all  their  influence,  and  all  their  endeavors, 
to  bring  them  into  a  state  of  freedom,  as  soon  as  a  door  for  it  can  be  safely 
opened.  Having  thus  expressed  our  views  of  slavery,  and  of  the  duty 
indispensably  incumbent  on  all  Christians  to  labor  for  Us  complete  extinc 
tion,  we  proceed  to  recommend,  and  we  do  it  with  all  the  earnestness 
and  solemnity  which  this  momentous  subject  demands,  a  particular 
attention  to  the  following  points. 

The  foregoing  embraces  the  chief  portion  of  the  report. 
Thus,  the  most  eminent  men  of  the  Presbyterian  Church, 


376  THE    CHURCH    AND    SLAVERY. 

in  her  highest  court,  including  many  of  the  most  renowned 
of  that  day  from  the  South,  who  lived  in  the  midst  of 
shivery,  and  knew  wrhereof  they  affirmed,  speak  of  slavery 
as  a  system,  of  wrhat  it  was  before  their  eyes  :  regarding 
it  as  opposed  both  to  humanity  and  religion,  to  the  u  law" 
and  "  gospel"  of  God ;  the  wrong  of  which,  to  their  view, 
was  "demonstrated,"  and  was  "generally  seen  and  ac 
knowledged  ;"  the  "  inconsistency"  of  which,  as  a  "  prac 
tice,"  among  Christians,  was  manifest ;  and,  therefore,  as 
involving  the  inevitably  resulting  duty,  to  seek  its  "extine- 
*  ion"  and  "  extermination,"  just  "  as  speedily  as  possible." 
The  recommendations  above  referred  to  are :  First,  that 
the  American  Colonization  Society  (for  colonizing  free 
blacks  in  Africa)  be  encouraged,  and  they  "  exceedingly 
rejoice  to  have  witnessed  its  origin  and  organization  among 
the  holders  of  slaves,  as  giving  an  unequivocal  pledge  of 
their  desire  to  deliver  themselves  and  their  country  from 
the  calamity  of  slavery."  Secondly,  they  recommend 
to  all  "  to  facilitate  and  encourage  the  instruction  of  their 
slaves  in  the  principles  and  duties  of  the  Christian  religion." 
Thirdly,  they  "  enjoin  it  on  all  Church  Sessions  and  Pres 
byteries,  under  the  care  of  this  Assembly,  to  discounte 
nance,  and  as  far  as  possible  to  prevent,  all  cruelty  of 
whatever  kind  in  the  treatment  of  slaves,  especially  the 
cruelty  of  separating  husband  and  wife,  parents  and  chil 
dren,"  etc.* 


*  The  authorship  of  this  celebrated  report  on  slavery,  of  1818,  has  been  controverted, 
some  attributing  it  to  Dr.  Baxter,  and  some  to  Dr.  Green.  The  point  is  easily  settled, 
first,  from  the  testimony  of  Dr.  Green,  the  Chairman  of  the  Committee  ;  second, 
from  the  testimony  of  Mr.  Burgess,  the  only  member  of  the  Committee  still  living ; 
third,  by  Dr.  J.  D.  Paxton,  a  member  of  that  Assembly;  all  of  whom  agree.  Dr. 
Green,  in  his  autobiography,  makes  the  following  statement  on  the  point:  "I  was  a 
commissioner  this  year  (1818)  to  the  General  Assembly."1  "Among  other  things, 
I  penned  the  minute  on  the  subject  of  slavery,  which  is  yet  referred  to  by  those  who 
are  hostile  to  African  slavery."  In  a  recent  letter  from  Mr.  Burgess  to  the 
writer,  is  found  some  interesting  items  in  the  history  of  this  paper.  Though  tha 


CHARACTERISTICS    OF    TUB    PAPER    OF    1818.  377 


CHARACTERISTICS    OF   THE   PAPER   OF    1818. 

Some  things  regarding  the  foregoing  document  should 
here  be  noted,  which  strikingly  illustrate  the  sentiments  of 
the  Church  and  of  the  country,  at  that  period,  upon  the 
institution  of  slavery  as  a  system. 

1.  It  will  be  difficult  to  find  in  the  English  language  a 
more  direct  and  decided  condemnation  of  the  system  than 
is  here  given.      Even  the  most  ultra  abolitionists   have 
never  expressed   themselves    more   emphatically.       They 
have  used  harsher  language,  and  they  have  had  no  such 
bowels  of  compassion  as  the  Assembly  felt,  in  view  of  the 
practical  difficulties  which  beset  the  whole  subject  in  any 
attempt  to  rid  the  country  of  the  institution  ;  but  upon  the 
simple  matter  of  disapprobation  of  the  system,  and  of  the 
duty  of  endeavoring  "  to  obtain  the  complete  abolition  of 
slavery  throughout  Christendom,  and  if  possible  through 
out  the  world,"  the  General  Assembly  here  go  as  far  as 
the  farthest. 

2.  This  paper  was  adopted  unanimously.     The  Church 
was  well  represented  from  the  South,  and  there  were  pres- 

letter  is  a  private  one,  he  takes  the  liberty  of  quoting  from  it.  Mr.  Burgess, 
it  will  be  seen,  introduced  the  subject  to  the  notice  of  the  Assembly,  and  thus 
"occasioned1"  its  action.  He  says:  li  I  was  a  member  of  what  was  then  the  Presby 
tery  of  Miami,  when  I  presented  the  paper  against  slavery.  The  Committee  which 
reported  the  paper,  commonly  called  the  paper  of  1818,  were  Dr.  Green,  Dr.  Baxter, 
and  myself.  Drs.  Green  and  Baxter  made  out  the  report  before  consulting  me  on 
the  subject;  so  that  I  am  not  responsible  for  the.  report  ;.t  all,  except  that  I  occa 
sioned  it."  He  further  says  :  "  I  was  sent  to  the  General  Assembly,  where  I  pre 
sented  my  paper,  having  first  consulted  Dr.  Joshua  L.  Wilson,  of  Cincinnati,  also 
Dr.  Robert  G.  Wilson,  of  Chillicothe,  Dr.  Hogc,  of  Columbus?,  and  Dr.  Mathew  Brown, 
then  President  of  Washington  College,  Penn.  When  I  laid  in  my  paper  before  the 
Committee  of  Bills  and  Overtures,  it  was  not  reported.  Then  I  took  an  appeal, 
agreeably  to  the  advice  of  President  E'own,  and  Kev.  John  Thompson,  and  others. 
My  appeal  was  sustained,  and  thus  the  paper  was  brought  before  the  Assembly.  Dr. 
Green  moved  that  the  subject  be  given  to  a  Committee  of  three  ministers."  Dr. 
Paxton,  who  was  a  member  of  the  Assembly  of  181 S,  and  also  of  the  Assembly  of 
1864.  bears  the  same  testimony,  in  a  letter  we  have  seen,  to  the  authorship  of  the 
paper,  ascribing  it  to  Dr.  Green. 


378  THE    CHURCH    AND    SLAVERY. 

ent  in  the  Assembly  the  following  distinguished  persons, 
among  the  clergy :  Drs.  Cue,  liomeyn,  Green,  Janeway, 
Ely,  Chester,  and  Jennings,  from  the  North,  and  Drs. 
Edgar,  Witherspoon,  and  Leland,  from  the  South,  all  of 
whom  have  at  some  time  been  Moderators  of  the  Assem 
bly;  and  also  from  the  North,  Drs.  Fitch,  Lansing, 
McClelland,  Gt-o.  C.  Potts,  Cathcart,  Matthew  Brown, 
Duffield,  and  Messrs.  Burges,  and  Dickey,  and  from  the 
South,  Drs.  Paxton,  Baxter,  Speece,  Morrison,  Mclver, 
Nathan  H.  Hall,  and  Mr.  James  K.  Burch,  besides  many 
others  from  both  sections,  of  no  doubt  equal  ability. 

3.  While  this  paper  expressed  the  solemn  judgment  of 
the  Church  in  all  parts  of  the  land,  it  also  expressed  the 
opinions  substantially  which  were  entertained  by  the  most 
distinguished  statesmen  of  every  portion  of  the  country, 
and  by  the  people  generally.     This  is  too  well  known  to 
be  questioned. 

4.  It  is  no  doubt  true,  also,  that  this  is  a  fair  representa 
tion  of  the  views  of  all  other  denominations  of  Christians. 
It  would  be  quite  remarkable  that  so  large  and  influential 
a  body  as  the  Presbyterian  Church,  extending  at  that  time 
into  nearly  every  State  and  Territory  of  the  Union,  should 
express,  through  its  highest  court,  a  unanimous  judgment 
in  terms  of  such  pointed  condemnation  of  slavery,  and  at 
the  same  time  not  exhibit  in  such  action  the  general  senti 
ment  of  other  denominations. 

SECOND    PERIOD. MORE    "  CONSERVATIVE'"  VIEWS. 

We  come  now  to  the  second  period  in  the  history  of 
opinions  on  the  subject  of  slavery.  We  find  them  first 
officially  brought  to  view,  so  far  ;is  the  action  of  the 
General  Assembly  of  the  Presbyterian  Church  is  con 
cerned,  in  the  year  1836.  The  reader  will  have  noticed 
a  complete  uniformity  in  sentiment  from  1787  to  1818, 


MORE    "CONSERVATIVE"   VIEWS.  o79 

embodying  disapprobation  of  the  system  in  each  of  the 
several  instances  in  which  a  judgment  was  expressed,  the 
main  difference  being  in  the  more  extended  expression  of 
views  in  the  paper  adopted  1818.  The  Church  appears  to 
have  been  satisfied  with  this  judgment  for  many  years,  for 
we  find  no  further  action  of  any  kind  upon  the  subject  till 
the  year  1830  ;  so  that,  in  round  numbers,  we  may  say  that 
such  had  been  its  views  for  a  period  of  fifty  years ;  though, 
undoubtedly,  the  transition  had  been  in  operation  for  some 
time. 

The  modification  of  these  opinions  in  the  Church  at  the 
North,  which  we  have  said  presents  a  characteristic  of  the 
second  period,  is  in  an  opposite  direction  to  that  commonly 
supposed. 

No  statement  has  been  more  frequently  made  since  the 
beginning  of  the  rebellion  than  this :  that  the  Northern 
Church  has  plunged  the  country  into  this  civil  war ;  that 
u  political  preachers  have  abolitionized  the  Church  and  the 
people ;"  that,  during  the  last  thirty  years,  the  Northern 
mind  had,  under  their  tutelage  chiefly,  been  educated  up 
to  a  point  of  unbearable  hostility  to  slavery;  that  this  has 
been  the  course  of  action  in  the  judgments  expressed  by 
leading  ecclesiastical  bodies ;  so  that  the  South  were 
actually  pushed  into  their  present  attitude  in  pure  self- 
defence  ;  and  that,  to  defend  themselves  against  modern 
opinions,  led  to  the  disruption  of  ecclesiastical  bodies,  and 
finally  to  secession  and  war.  These  charges  have  formed 
the  staple  of  a  certain  style  of  oratory  upon  the  stump  and 
in  Congress,  both  from  the  North  and  the  South,  and  the 
substance  of  many  editorials  in  a  certain  class  of  public 
journals. 

Now  it  so  happens  that  the  facts  are  the  precise  reverse 
of  this,  so  far  as  the  action  of  many  of  the  large  bodies  of 
Christians  and  the  opinions  of  many  of  the  leading  men  in 
17* 


380  THE    CHURCH    AND    SLAVERY. 

every  branch  of  the  Northern  Church  are  concerned. 
Whether  it  be  a  matter  for  rejoicing  or  mourning,  the  fact 
is  undeniable, — as  shown  by  official  documents  of  religious 
bodies,  and  by  the  formal  utterances  of  leading  divines, — 
that  during  this  very  period  of  the  last  thirty  years  previous 
to  the  rebellion,  instead  of  the  Church  and  these  influential 
classes  of  the  people  becoming,  as  charged,  "  more  and 
more  abolitionized,"  there  was  a  very  marked  abatement 
in  their  opinions  and  in  their  course  of  action  in  opposition 
to  slavery, — judged  from  the  stand-point  of  1818, — and  a 
disposition  frequently  manifested  to  concede  to  the  South, 
in  both  sentiment  and  action,  that  which  placed  the 
Church,  in  the  judgment  of  Southern  divines,  in  decided 
antagonism  to  the  whole  current  of  its  former  testimonies. 

ACTION   POSTPONED. — 1836. 

The  proof  is  indisputable.  The  first  example  we  take 
from  the  action  of  the  Presbyterian  Church.  Its  testimony 
of  1818  had  become  practically  a  dead  letter.  "The  sub 
ject  being  pressed  on  its  attention  by  various  memorials," 
the  General  Assembly,  in  1836,  adopted  this  minute: 

Inasmuch  as  the  Constitution  of  the  Presbyterian  Church,  in  its  pre 
liminary  and  fundamental  principles,  declares  that  no  Church  judicatory 
ought  to  pretend  to  make  laws,  to  bind  the  conscience,  in  virtue  of  their 
own  authority ;  and  as  the  urgency  of  the  business  of  the  Assembly, 
and  the  shortness  of  the  time  during  which  they  can  continue  in  session, 
render  it  impossible  to  deliberate  and  decide  judiciously  on  the  subject 
of  slavery  in  its  relations  to  the  Church ;  therefore,  Resolved,  That  this 
whole  subject  be  indefinitely  postponed. 

What  a  marked  contrast  appears  between  this  action 
and  that  of  former  years  ;  and  wherefore  ?  The  "funda 
mental  principles"  of  the  Presbyterian  Church  were  the 
same  as  formerly.  The  Assembly  had  just  as  much 
"  authority  to  make  laws"  and  "  to  bind  the  conscience" 


ACTION   POSTPONED. — 1836.  381 

AS  they  ever  had,  and  the  institution  on  which  they  were 
•  •ailed  to  speak  was  the  same  in  character;  at  least  it  had 
not  iinpr oved>  ihough  it  had  extended  its  borders  and  was 
becoming  a  mighty  power  in  the  land.  It  is  no  doubt  true 
that  "  the  urgency  of  the  business"  was  great.  It  was 
just  then  that  the  disputes  between  the  Old  and  New 
School  were  culminating.  But  the  length  of  "  time  during 
which"  they  could  "  continue  in  session"  was  within  their 
own  keeping. 

There  is  something  very  significant  in  the  statement  that 
it  was  u  impossible  to  deliberate  and  decide  judiciously 
on  the  subject  of  slavery  in  its  relations  to  the  Church." 
What  was  there  which  demanded  special  circumspection 
just  then,  lest  they  should  pronounce  unadvisedly  ?  Were 
not  their  previous  testimonies  most  explicit?  If  they 
deemed  them  right,  how  much  "  time"  would  it  have  taken 
simply  to  refer  the  memorialists  to  them  as  still  their  sen 
timents,  as  representatives  of  the  Church,  as  had  been  done 
several  times  before  ?  This  would  have  required  fewer 
words  than  were  employed  to  justify  indefinite  postpone 
ment.  If  their  previous  action  was  wrong,  it  should  have 
been  revoked,  however  much  time  might  have  been 
required,  for  it  touched  and  decided  a  most  radical  ques 
tion  in  morals  and  religion.  Granting  what  was  of  course 
true,  that  the  Assembly  had  no  authority  "  to  make  laws," 
they  could  certainly  declare  the  law  of  God  on  the  subject, 
and  this  was  all  that  was  requisite. 

The  truth  is,  that  the  views  of  the  whole  subject  enter 
tained  by  many  in  the  Assembly  representing  the  South 
ern  section  of  the  Church  had  undergone  a  change.  Some 
were  in  a  transition  state,  and  some  had  totally  reversed 
their  opinions;  so  that,  at  this  time,  the  doctrines  of  1818 
began  to  be  odious  to  Southern  men.  They  were  not 
roady  to  make  open  war  upon  those  doctrines  in  the 


382  THE    CIIUECII    AND    SLAVERY. 

Assembly,  as  they  were  beginning  to  do  through  ti.c 
Southern  press,  but  it  would  have  been  hazardous  to 
attempt  at  that  time  a  re:iffirmation  of  them. 

FORMAL  "  CONSERVATIVE"  ACTION  OF  1845. 
The  next  formal  declaration  of  sentiment  made  by  the 
General  Assembly  was  in  1845.*     Seven  years  before  this 

*  The  committee  to  whom  were  referred  the  memorials  on  the  subject  of  slavery, 
beg  leave  to  submit  the  following  report: 

(«)  The  memorialists  may  be  divided  into  three  classes,  viz.:  1.  Those  which 
represent  the  system  of  slavery,  as  it  exists  in  these  United  States,  as  a  great  evil, 
and  pray  this  General  Assembly  to  adopt  measures  for  the  amelioration  of  the  con 
dition  of  the  slaves.  2.  Those,  which  ask  the  Assembly  to  receive  memorials  on  the 
subject  of  slavery,  to  allow  a  full  discussion  of  it,  and  to  enjoin  upon  the  members 
of  our  Church,  residing  in  States  whose  laws  forbid  the  slaves  being  taught  to  read, 
to  seek  by  all  lawful  means  the  repeal  of  those  laws.  3.  Those  which  represent 
slavery  as  a  moral  evil,  a  heinous  sin  in  the  sight  of  God,  calculated  to  bring  upon 
the  Church  the  curse  of  God,  and  calling  for  the  exercise  of  discipline  in  the  case  of 
those  who  persist  in  maintaining  or  justifying  the  relation  of  master  to  slaves. 

(I)  The  question  which  is  now  unhappily  agitating  and  dividing  other  branches 
of  the  Church,  and  which  is  pressed  upon  the  attention  of  the  Assembly  by  one  of 
the  three  classes  of  memorialists  just  named,  is,  whether  the  holding  of  slaves  is, 
under  all  circumstances,  a  heinous  sin,  calling  for  the  discipline  of  the  Church. 

(c)  The  Church  of  Christ  is  a  spiritual  body,  whose  jurisdiction  extends  to  the 
religious  faith  and  moral  conduct  of  her  members.     She  cannot  legislate  where 
Christ  has  not  legislated,  nor  make  terms  of  membership  which  he  has  not  made. 
The  question,  therefore,  which  this  Assembly  is  called  to  de.cide,  is  this:  Do  the 
Scriptures  teach  that  the  holding  of  slaves,  without  regard  to  circumstances,  is  a  sin, 
the  renunciation  of  which  should  be  made  a  condition  of  membership  in  the  Church 
of  Christ  ? 

(d)  It  is  impossible  to  answer  this  question  in  the  affirmative,  without  contra 
dicting  some  of  the  plainest  declarations  of  the  word  of  Sod.     That  slavery  existed 
in  the  days  of  Christ  and  His  Apostles  is  an  admitted  fact.     That  they  did  not 
denounce  the  relation  itself  as  sinful,  as  inconsistent  with  Christianity ;  that  slave 
holders  were  admitted  to  membership  in  the  Churches  organized  by  the  Apostles; 
that  whilst  they  were  required  to  treat  their  slaves  with  kindness,  and  as  rational, 
accountable,  immortal  beings,  and,  if  Christians,  as  brethren  in  the  Lord,  they  were 
not  commanded  to  emancipate  them;  that  slaves  were  required  to  be  "obedient  to 
their  masters  according  to  the  flesh,  with  fear  and  trembling,  with  singleness  of 
heart  as  unto  Christ,"  are  facts  which  meet  the  eye  of  every  reader  of  the  New  Tes 
tament.    This  Assembly  cannot,  therefore,  denounce  the  holding  of  slaves  as  neces 
sarily  a  heinous  and  scandalous  sin,  calculated  to  bring  upon  the  Church  the  curse 
of  God,  without  charging  the  Apostles  of  Christ  with  conniving  at  sin,  introducing 
into  the  Church  such   sinners,  and   thus  bringing  upon  them   the  curse   of  the 
Almighty. 

(e)  In  so  saying,  however,  the  Assembly  aro  not  to  be  understood  as  denying  that 


FORMAL  "CONSERVATIVE"  ACTION  OF  1845.       383 

the  division  into  New  and  Old  School  had  occurred,  and 
therefore  the  action  of 'which  we  now  speak  was  that  of 
the  latter  body  only.  Both  still  extended  into  the 
Southern  States,  though  the  Old  School  had  much  the 

there  is  evil  connected  with  slavery.  Much  less  do  they  approve  those  defective 
and  oppressive  laws  by  which,  in  some  of  the  States,  it  is  regulated.  Nor  would 
they  l.y  any  means  countenance  the  traffic  in  slaves  for  the  sake  of  gain ;  the  separa 
tion  of  husbands  and  wives,  parents  and  children,  for  the  sake  of  "filthy  lucre,"1  or 
f->\-  the  convenience  of  the  master;  or  cruel  treatment  of  slaves,  in  any  respect. 
Every  Christian  and  philanthropist  certainly  should  seek,  by  all  peaceable  and  law 
ful  means,  the  repeal  of  unjust  and  oppressive  laws,  and  the  amendment  of  such  as 
are  defective,  so  as  to  protect  the  slaves  from  cruel  treatment  by  wicked  men,  and 
secure  to  them  the  right  to  receive  religious  instruction. 

(/)  Nor  is  the  Assembly  to  be  understood  as  countenancing  the  idea  that  masters 
may  regard  their  servants  as  mere  property,  and  not  as  human  beings,  rational, 
accountable,  immortal.  The  Scriptures  prescribe  not  only  the  duties  of  servants, 
but  of  masters  also,  warning" the  latter  to  discharge  those  duties,  "  knowing  that 
thoir  Master  is  in  heaven,  neither  is  there  respect  of  persons  with  Him." 

(g)  The  Assembly  intend  simply  to  say,  that  since  Christ  and  His  inspired  Apos 
tles  did  not  make  the  holding  of  slaves  a  bar  to  communion,  we,  as  a  court  of  Christ, 
have  no  authority  to  do  so ;  since  they  did  not  attempt  to  remove  it  from  the 
Church  by  legislation,  we  have  no  authority  to  legislate  on  the  subject.  We  fee! 
constrained  further  to  say,  that  however  desirable  it  may  be  to  ameliorate  the  con 
dition  of  the  slaves  in  tiie  Southern  and  Western  States,  or  to  remove  slavery  from 
our  country,  these  objects,  we  are  fully  persuaded,  can  never  be  secured  by  ecclesi 
astical  legislation.  Much  less  can  they  be  attained  by  those  indiscriminate  denun 
ciations  against  slaveholders,  without  regard  to  their  character  or  circumstances, 
which  have  to  so  great  an  extent  characterized  the  movements  of  modern  abolition 
ists,  which,  so  far  from  removing  the  evils  complained  of,  tend  only  to  perpetuate 
and  aggravate  them.  The  Apostles  of  Christ  sought  to  ameliorate  the  condition  of 
slaves,  not  by  denouncing  and  excommunicating  their  masters,  but  by  teaching  both 
masters  and  slaves  the  glorious  doctrines  of  the  Gospel,  and  enjoining  upon  each 
the  discharge  of  their  relative  duties.  Thus  only  can  the  Church  of  Christ,  as  such, 
now  improve  the  condition  of  the  slaves  in  our  country. 

(/i)  As  to  the  extent  of  the  evils  involved  in  slavery,  and  the  best  methods  of 
removing  them,  various  opinions  prevail,  and  neither  the  Scriptures  nor  our  Consti 
tution  authorize  this  body  to  prescribe  any  particular  course  to  be  pursued  by  the 
Churches  under  our  care.  The  Assembly  cannot  but  rejoice,  however,  to  learn  that 
the  Ministers  and  Churches  in  the  slavehoiding  States  are  awaking  to  a  deeper 
sense  of  their  obligation  to  extend  to  the  slave  population  generally  the  means  of 
grace,  and  many  slaveholders  not  professedly  religious  favor  this  object  We 
earnestly  exhort  them  to  abound  more  and  more  in  this  good  work.  We  would 
exhort  every  believing  master  to  remember  that  his  Master  is  also  in  heaven,  and, 
in  view  of  all  the  circumstances  in  which  he  is  placed,  to  act  in  the  spirit  of  the 
golden  rule :  "  Whatsoever  ye  would  that  men  should  do  to  you,  do  ye  even  the  saino 
to  them." 


384  THE    CHTTECH    AND   SLAVERY. 

larger  membership  there,  and  its   Churches  were  located 
in  every  part  of  the  South. 

As  our  purpose  here  is  chiefly  historical,  and  as  we  aim 
merely  to  show  a  change  in  sentiment  in  the  Church,  wo 
need  not  stop  to  discuss  the  merits  of  this  or  any  other 
paper  which  the  Assembly  has  from  time  to  time  adopted. 
This  paper  shows,  however,  marked  concessions  to  the 
extremists  of  the  South,  as  compared  with  the  Assembly's 
earlier  action,  and  has  uniformly  been  so  interpreted  by 
Southern  members.* 

In  view  of  the  above  stated  principles  and  facts, 

Resolved,  1.  That  the  General  Assembly  of  the  Presbyterian  Church  in  the 
United  States  was  originally  organized,  and  has  since  continued  the  bond  of  union 
in  the  Church,  upon  the  conceded  principle  that  the  existence  of  domestic  slavery, 
under  the  circumstances  in  which  it  is  found  in  the  Southern  portion  of  the  country, 
is  no  bar  to  Christian  communion. 

2.  That  the  petitions  that  ask  the  Assembly  to  make  the  holding  of  slaves  in  itself 
a  matter  of  discipline,  do  virtually  require  this  judicatory  to  dissolve  itself,  and 
abandon  the  organization  under  which,  by  the  Divine  blessing,  it  has  so  long  pros 
pered.  The  tendency  is  evidently  to  separate  the  Northern  from  the  Southern  por 
tion  of  the  Church  ;  a  result  which  every  good  citizen  must  deplore,  as  tending  to 
the  dissolution  of  the  Union  of  our  beloved  country,  and  which  every  enlightened 
Christian  will  oppose,  as  bringing  about  a  ruinous  and  unnecessary  schism  between 
brethren  who  maintain  a  common  faith. 

The  yeas  and  nays  being  ordered,  were  recorded.    [Yeas,  163 ;  nays,  13  ;  excused,  4.] 

*  Referring  directly  to  the  Act  of  1845,  the  "  General  Assembly  of  the  Confederate 
States,"  in  their  "  Address  to  all  the  Churches  throughout  the  Earth,"  written  by 
Dr.  Thornwell,  and  "adopted  unanimously  by  the  Assembly,"  say:  "The  Presby 
terian  Church  in  the  United  States  has  been  enabled,  by  divine  grace,  to  pursue, 
for  the  most  part,  an  eminently  conservative,  because  a  thoroughly  Scriptural, 
policy  in  relation  to  this  delicate  question.  It  has  planted  itself  upon  the  word  of 
God,  and  utterly  refused  to  make  slaveholding  a  sin,  or  non-slaveholding  a  term  of 
communion.1"  This  explicit  reference  to  the  Act  of  1845  was  made  at  Augusta, 
Georgia,  December,  1861.  To  show  how  the  Act  of  1818  is  regarded  at  the  South,— 
an  Act  accepted  from  the  above  commendation  by  the  words,  "for  the  most  part," — 
we  refer  to  the  Southern  Presbyterian  Review,  April,  1861,  which  says:  ''It  was 
during  this  period  that  the  various  religious  bodies  made  their  deliverances  on  the 
subject  of  slavery,  and  among  them  the  General  Assembly  of  the  Presbyterian 
Church  adopted,  in  1818,  a  series  of  resolutions  looking  very  earnestly  toward  the 
gradual  emancipation  of  the  slaves.  These  resolutions  were  drawn  up  by  Southern 
men,  who  were  themselves  slaveholders,  and  they  were  passed  by  tlie  votes  of 
Southern  ministers  and  elders.  With  reference  to  other  denominations,  a  rigid 
adherence  to  the  modes  of  thought  and  feeling  of  those  days  has  led  to  the  disrup 
tion  of  the  Churches;  while  the  Old  School  Presbyterian  Church,  commonly 


CONTRAST. ACTION  OF  1818  AND  1845.      386 

This  characteristic  of  the  paper  may  be  seen  at  a  glance. 
The  strongest  expressions  which  it  contains  against  slavery 
as  a  system  are  these  : 

In  saying  so,  however,  the  Assembly  are  not  to  be  understood  as 
denying  that  there  is  evil  connected  with  slavery.  Much  less  do  they 
approve  those  defective  and  oppressive  laws  by  which,  in  some  cf  the 
States,  it  is  regulated.  Nor  would  they  by  any  means  countenance 
the  traffic  in  slaves  for  the  sake  of  gain ;  the  separation  of  husbands 
and  wives,  parents  and  children,  for  the  sake  of  li  filthy  lucre,"  or  for 
the  convenience  of  the  master;  or  cruel  treatment  of  slaves,  in  any 
respect.  *  *  *  Xor  is  the  Assembly  to  be  understood  as  counte 
nancing  the  idea  that  masters  may  regard  their  servants  as  mere  prop 
erty,  and  not  as  human  beings,  rational,  accountable,  immortal.  *  *  * 
As  to  the  extent  of  the  evils  involved  in  slavery,  and  the  best  methods 
of  removing  them,  various  opinions  prevail,  and  neither  the  Scriptures 
nor  our  Constitution  authorize  this  body  to  prescribe  any  particular 
course  to  be  pursued  by  the  Churches  under  our  care. 

CONTRAST. ACTION    OF    1818    AND    1845. 

The  reader  need  only  compare  these  tender  sentences 
with  the  great  burden  of  condemnation  in  the  paper  of 
1818,  to  see  that  here  is  a  most  noticeable  modification 
from  that  expressed  twenty-seven  years  before.  The  two 
papers  are  very  nearly  of  the  same  length,  and  present  the 
following  striking  points  of  contrast : 

1 .  In  the  paper  of  1818,  the  Assembly  speak  in  positives. 
They  deal  with  the  system,  and  pronounce  it  "utterly 
inconsistent  with  the  law  of  God,"  and  as  "  totally  irrecon 
cilable  with  the  spirit  and  principles  of  the  Gospel  of 
Christ;"  and  say,  "Slavery  creates  a  paradox  in  the 
moral  system,"  and  that  "the  slave  is  deprived  of  his 
natural  right,  degraded  as  a  human  being,"  etc.  These 

icgarded  as  so  tenacious  of  the  past,  and  even  reproached  as  a  fossil  Church,  and 
her  doctrines  derided  as  fossil  Christianity,  has  had  the  wisdom  given  her  to  under 
stand  ttie  progress  of  events,  and  to  keep  fully  abreast  of  the  age.  The  action  of 
1 S18  still  stands  upon  her  records,  not  an  the  law,  BUT  TIIK  HISTOUY  OF  THE  SUBJKOT  ; 
and  Southern  Presbyterians  are  well  content  that  it  should  so  stand  " 


a 86  THE    CHUECH    AND    SLAVERY. 

positives  condemn  the  tiling  in  its  essence,  and  assert  a 
radical  deprivation  in  the  concrete  as  attaching  to  "  the 
slave1'  in  person,  and  that  too  in  every  case,  as  shown  by 
the  exceptions  referred  to,  In  the  paper  of  1845,  in 
speaking  of  the  system,  the  Assembly  deal  in  negatives  • 
and  so  far  as  they  find  any  thing  to  disapprove,  it  is  not 
at  all  in  the  thing,  but  wholly  in  what  they  deem  its  mere 
adjuncts.  The  farthest  they  can  go  is  to  wish  "  not  to  be 
understood  as  denying  that  there  is  evil  connected  with 
slavery."  They  utter  no  direct  condemnation  of  the  "  op 
pressive  laws"  of  slavery,  but  are  content  with  saying, 
"much  less  do  they  approve"  of  them.  They  do  not 
positively  condemn  even  "  the  traffic  in  slaves  for  the  sake 
of  gain," — which  always  has  been  the  life,  soul,  and  power 
of  the  whole  system, — nor  even  "the  separation  of  hus 
bands  and  wives,  parents  and  children,  for  the  sake  of 
'  filthy  lucre,'  or  for  the  convenience  of  the  master ;  or 
cruel  treatment  of  slaves,  in  any  respect;"  but  the  utmost 
they  feel  called  upon  to  say  about  these  crying  evils  is, 
u  nor  vjould  they  by  any  means  countenance  them  !"  The 
whole  style  of  dealing  with  the  institution  shows  that 
they  were  bent  on  giving  "  a  soft  answer"  to  the  memo 
rialists,  as  it  "  turneth  away  the  wrath"  of  Southern  ex 
tremists. 

2.  The  paper  of  1818  styles  "enslaving  a  portion  of 
their  brethren  of  mankind"  as  a  "practice  into  which 
Christian  people  have  most  inconsistently  fallen,"  and 
declares  that  "  the  inconsistency  of  slavery  both  with  the 
dictates  of  humanity  and  religion  has  been  demonstrated, 
and  is  generally  seen  and  acknowledged."  The  paper  of 
1845  admits  the  consistency  of  this  "practice"  with 
Christian  character,  asserting  that  the  denial  of  this  posi 
tion  is  against  "  some  of  the  plainest  declarations  of  the 
word  of  God." 


CONTRAST. — ACTION  OF  1818  AND  1845.      387 

3.  The  Assembly  of  1818,  starting  from  their  position 
last  noticed,  declare  that  "  it  is  manifestly  the  duty  of  all 
Christians  who  enjoy  the  light  of  the  present  day,"  "to 
use  their  honest,  earnest,  and  unwearied  endeavors,  *  *  * 
to  obtain  the  complete  abolition  of  slavery  throughout 
Christendom,  and  if  possible  throughout  the  world."    The 
Assembly  of  1845,  starting  from  their  own  position,  arrive 
as   naturally  at  an  opposite  conclusion.     They  have  not 
even  a  situ/le  "sq/jj"  word  for  emancipation,  hut  some 
that  are  not  so  soft  against  "  the  movements  of  modern 
abolitionists,'"  charging  them  with  "indiscriminate  denun 
ciations." 

4.  The  Assembly  of  1818   believed  that   the    Church 
could  do  much  towards  ridding  the  country  and  the  whole 
world  of  slavery;  hence  they  urge   action   to   this   end 
upon  their  members.     They  moreover  "rejoice  that  the 
Church"  they  represented  "  commenced  as  early  as  any 
other  in  this  country  the  good  work  of  endeavoring  to 
put  an  end  to  slavery,  and  that  in  the  same  work  many 
of  its  members  have  ever  since  been,  and  now  are,  among 
the  most  active,  vigorous,  and  efficient  laborers  ;"  and  they 
"  earnestly  exhort"  their  members  in  the  South  "  to  con 
tinue,  and,  if  possible,  to  increase  their  exertions  to  effect 
a  total   abolition   of  slavery."     The   whole  drift  of  the 
paper  of  1845  is  to  afford  palliatives  to  the  system,  to  make 
those  concerned   in  it  contented  with  their  lot,  and  not 
the  remotest  wish  is  directly  and  positively  expressed  that 
the  Church  or  the  country  may  ever  be  rid  of  it,  but 
rather  the  efforts  of  the  Church  to  remove  it  are  positively 
discouraged.     This  will  be   seen  from  the  only  sentence 
in  which  emancipation  is  in  any  manner  alluded  to :  "  We 
feel  constrained  further  to  say,  that  however  desirable  it 
may  be  to  ameliorate  the  condition  of  the  slaves  in  the 
Southern  and  Western  States,  or  to  remove  slavery  from 


388  THE    CHURCH    AND    SLAVERY. 

the  country,  these  objects,  we  are  fully  persuaded,  can 
never  be  secured  by  ecclesiastical  legislation." 

We  have  already  said  that  our  object  here  does  not 
lead  us  to  examine  the  merits  of  these  papers,  to  deter 
mine  which  is  more  consonant  with  the  word  of  God. 
We  aim  in  this  comparison  simply  to  show  their  contra 
riety,  and  to  present  it  as  one  of  the  items  of  evidence  to 
prove  that  the  Church  had  greatly  abated  in  its  opposi 
tion  to  slavery,  during  the  very  period  with  which  she  is 
charged  with  having  provoked  the  South  by  her  abolition 
sentiments.  A  great  deal  of  discussion  has  taken  place 
upon  these  papers,  and  some  have  attempted  to  "show  that 
they  maintain  the  same  bearing  towards  slavery.  This 
dispute  may  be  continued  till  doomsday,  and  it  will  still 
be  true,  as  long  as  there  is  any  force  in  language,  that  in 
the  latter  there  is  evinced  a  great  letting  down  in  the  feel- 
inff  °f  opposition  to  the  system,  as  compared  with  the 
former. 

This  comparison  of  the  language, — along  with  the  fact 
that  the  paper  of  1818  passed  unanimously,  while  that  of 
1845  had  only  thirteen  nays,  with  four  excused  from 
voting,  against  one  hundred  and  sixty-eight  yeas,  and  the 
further  notorious  fact  that  the  South  always  claimed  this 
as  a  triumph, — shows  that  at  this  time  the  Presbyterian 
Church  had  gone  far  in  yielding  to  the  wishes  of  extre 
mists  among  Southern  divines ;  just  as  Northern  statesmen 
had  gone  in  yielding  to  the  statesmen  of  the  South. 

ACTION    OF    1846. DECLARATION  OF    AGREEMENT. 

We  of  course  notice  the  action  of  subsequent  Assem 
blies,  to  see  what  view  was  entertained  by  them  of  the 
respective  papers  of  1818  and  1845.  So  manifest  was  it 
to  a  large  portion  of  the  Presbyterian  Church,  both  North 
and  South,  that  the  interpretation  we  have  given  is  cor- 


ACTION   OF    184C  — DECLARATION    OF    AGREEMENT.     389 

reel,  that  the  Assembly  of  1846  was  besieged  to  make  a 
deliverance,  by  u  a  collection  of  petitions  and  memorials 
on  the  subject  of  slavery."  The  following  report  was 
made : 

Our  Church  has  from  time  to  time,  during  a  period  of  nearly  sixty 
years,  expressed  its  views  on  the  subject  of  slavery.  During  all  this 
period  it  has  held  and  uttered  substantially  the  same  sentiments.  Be 
lieving  that  this  uniform  testimony  is  true,  and  capable  of  vindication 
from  the  word  of  God,  the  Assembly  is  at  the  same  time  clearly  of  the 
opinion  that  it  has  already  deliberately  and  solemnly  spoken  on  this 
subject  with  sufficient  fulness  and  clearness.  Therefore,  Resolved,  that 
no  further  action  upon  this  subject  is  at  present  needed.  *  *  *  * 
The  following  amendment  was  offered  and  laid  on  the  table,  viz. :  "  Ex 
cept  to  say,  that  the  action  of  the  Assembly  of  1845  is  not  understood 
by  this  Assembly  to  deny  or  rescind  the  testimony  that  has  been  ut 
tered  by  the  General  Assembly  previous  to  that  date."  The  question 
was  then  taken  on  the  report,  when  the  ayes  and  noes  were  called  for, 
and  are  as  follows:  ayes,  119;  noes,  33. 

Subsequently,  it  appears,  the  same  gentleman  who  of 
fered  the  amendment  which  had  been  tabled,  presented 
the  following  resolution,  which  "  was  adopted  without 
division :" 

Resolved,  That  in  the  judgment  of  this  house,  the  action  of  the 
General  Assembly  of  1845  was  not  intended  to  deny  or  rescind  the 
testimony  often  uttered  by  the  General  Assemblies  previous  to  that 
date. 

Those  who  are  at  all  acquainted  with  deliberative  bodies, 
know  that  they,  as  truly  as  individuals,  are  subject  to 
moods  and  humors,  and  that  it  is  often  difficult  to  divine  the 
motive  for  their  votes,  or  the  influences  at  work  to  produce 
them.  An  illustration  is  before  us.  It  is  not  easy  to 
understand  why  the  Assembly  should  table  so  important 
an  amendment,  and  afterwards  pass  it  in  precisely  the  same 
words,  so  far  as  its  essence  is  concerned.  It  does  not 
appear  from  the  Digest  (from  which  our  extracts  are  taken), 
at  n  hat  stage  of  the  proceedings  the  resolution  passed.  It 


390  THE    CHURCH    AND    SLAVERY. 

may  have  been  near  the  close,  when,  as  often  observed, 
business  is  pressing,  members  are  inattentive,  or  many 
have  retired  from  the  body,  or  when  some  are  bent  on 
carrying  some  special  measure  of  their  own,  and  arc  using 
the  lever  employed  among  politicians  in  "  log-rolling ;" 
circumstances  under  which,  in  all  deliberative  bodies,  eccle 
siastical  not  excluded,  important  measures  are  sometimes 
"  put  through."* 

But  put  any  construction  which  is  allowable  upon  these 
proceedings,  including  the  original  report  (which,  how 
ever,  had  a  large  minority  against  it),  and  the  most  remark 
able  thing  of  all  is,  that  the  Assembly  should  have  deemed 
the  sentiments  uttered  "  on  the  subject  of  slavery"  "  during 
a  period  of  nearly  sixty  years"  as  "  substantially  the  same ;" 
and,  therefore,  not  disagreeing  with  those  expressed  in 
1 845 — provided  that  is  what  indeed  they  meant.  A  decla 
ration,  however,  to  that  effect,  does  not  make  it  evident, 
even  though  made  by  the  General  Assembly.  The  terms, 
palliatives,  tone,  spirit,  negations,  omissions,  of  the  paper 
of  1845,  and  the  regard  paid  to  it  universally  in  the  South, 
all  serve  to  show,  as  does  the  judgment  of  a  vast  number 
in -the  North,  that  it  embodies  principles  in  conflict  with 
those  so  plainly  declared  in  1818.  The  case  is  clear,  if  the 
language  in  these  respective  papers  is  not  to  be  taken  in  a 
sense  wholly  diplomatic.  But  there  is  a  far  more  conclu 
sive  proof,  if  the  action  of  the  Assembly  is  to  be  taken  as 

*  "  We  all  know  and  admit  that  a  vote  of  the  Assembly  does  not  always  express 
even  the  settled  conviction  of  that  body  itself.  Such  votes  are  often  given  hastily, 
without  due  consideration,  or  from  motives  not  affecting  the  principle  involved  in 
the  case  decided.  At  the  end  of  the  session,  to  avoid  discussion,  or  to  save  time, 
things  are  often  passed,  or  passed  over,  which,  under  other  circumstances,  would 
have  met  a  different  lute.  It  is  also  to  be  considered,  that  all  who  vote  for  a  partic 
ular  measure  do  not  commonly  do  so  for  the  same  reasons.  A  vote  to  lay  a  resolu 
tion  on  the  table  is  not  decisive  evidence  that  those  who  joined  in  it  sanctioned  the 
arguments  of  the  speakers  by  whom  the  measure  was  advocated." — Princeton  Re- 
View  on  the  General  Assembly  of  1859. 


ANOTHER   CONTRAST. 1818    AND    1849.  391 

decisive,  that  these  papers  are  materially  discordant. 
Before  referring  to  it,  however,  (1863),  we  must  examine 
other  deliverances  in  their  order. 

ANOTHER    CONTRAST. 1818    AND    1849. 

The  next  paper  adopted  by  the  General  Assembly  was 
in  1849.  It  originated  in  three  memorials,  one  praying 
the  Assembly  "  not  only  to  declare  slavery  to  be  a  sin,  but 
to  enjoin  upon  all  inferior  courts  a  course  of  discipline 
which  will  remove  it  from  our  Church ;"  a  second,  "  asking 
the  Assembly  to  appoint  a  committee  to  collect  and  report 
to  the  next  Assembly,  statistics  on  this  subject,  and  digest 
a  plan  of  abolition  to  be  adopted  by  our  Church ;"  and  the 
third,  "asking  the  Assembly  to  alter  sundry  terms  and 
passages  in  the  act  of  1845,  relating  to  slavery."  Upon 
these  memorials,  the  Assembly  adopted  the  following 
paper: 

(1.)  That  the  principles  of  the  Presbyterian  Church  on  the  subject  of 
slavery  are  already  set  forth  in  repeated  declarations,  so  full  and  so 
explicit  as  to  need  no  further  exposition.  (2.)  That  in  view  of  the  civil 
and  domestic  nature  of  this  institution,  and  the  competency  of  secular 
Legislatures  alone  to  remove  it,  and  in  view  of  the  earnest  inquiry  and 
deep  agitation  on  the  subject,  which  we  now  observe  in  one  or  more 
commonwealths  of  our  country  where  slavery  exists,  it  be  considered 
peculiarly  improper  and  inexpedient  for  this  General  Assembly  to 
attempt  or  propose  measures  in  the  work  of  emancipation.  (8.)  That 
all  necessary  and  proper  provision  is  already  made,  for  the  just  exercise 
of  discipline  upon  those  who  neglect  or  violate  the  mutual  duties  of 
master  and  servant ;  and  the  General  Assembly  is  always  ready  to 
enforce  these  provisions,  where  the  unfaithfulness  of  any  inferior  court 
is  made  manifest,  by  record,  or  appeal,  or  complaint.  (4.)  We  rejoice  to 
belie  re  that  the  action  of  former  Assemblies,  so  far  from  aiding  or 
allowing  the  iniquitous  oppression  of  man  by  his  fellow-man,  has  been 
steadily  promoting  amelioration  in  the  condition  of  slaves,  by  winning 
the  confidence  of  masters,  in  our  freedom  from  fanaticism,  and  by  stim 
ulating  the  slaveholder  and  his  pastor  alike,  to  labor  in  the  religious 


392  THE   CHURCH   AND    SLAVEET. 

instruction  of  the  blacks.  (5.)  That  it  be  enjoined  on  Presbyteries 
.situated  in  slaveholding  Slates  to  continue  and  increase  their  exertions 
for  the  religious  instruction  of  slaves,  and  to  report  distinctly,  in  their 
annual  narratives  to  the  General  Assembly,  the  state  of  religion  among 
the  colored  population. 


A  careful  examination  will  show  that  this  paper  presents 
points  of  decided  contrast  to  that  of  1818.  It  indeed  says 
that  "  the  principles"  of  the  Church  on  this  subject  as  pre 
viously  "  set  forth"  are  "  so  full  and  so  explicit  as  to  need 
no  further  exposition  ;"  but  this  is  very  different  from  ex 
plicitly  adopting  them.  If,  however,  it  be  maintained  that 
this  is  equivalent  to  an  approval,  it  is  very  plain  that  other 
44  principles1'  are  here  introduced  directly  antagonistic  to 
those  of  the  earlier  paper;  or,  at  the  very  least,  discour 
agements  are  presented  to  the  most  important  action  which 
that  paper  urged  upon  the  Church.  For  example,  in  1849, 
"  the  civil  and  domestic  nature"  of  slavery,  "  and  the  com 
petency  of  secular  Legislatures  alone  to  remove  it,"  appear 
to  have  been  discovered,  and  are  deemed  obstacles  to 
emancipation.  But  its  "  nature"  and  its  civil  status  were 
always  the  same  ;  and  while  it  was  true  that  "  secular 
Legislatures"  alone  could  remove  it  as  a  whole  from  their 
respective  States,  it  was  also  true  that  individuals  might 
at  anytime  remove  it  from  themselves,  and  from  the  Church, 
had  they  chosen  to  make  the  sacrifice.  If  the  laws  required 
emancipated  slaves  to  be  removed  beyond  the  precincts  of 
the  State,  it  was  only  a  question  of  dollars  and  cents  where 
there  was  a  disposition  to  emancipate.  On  the  well-known 
ground  of  individual  ability,  even  under  sacrifices,  —  as 
well  as  the  influence  of  the  Church,  if  rightly  directed,  to 
bring  about  emancipation  in  the  State  at  large,  —  emanci 
pation  is  urged  in  1818,  and  members  are  exhorted  to  it, 
"uninfluenced  by  the  expense  or  inconvenience"  which  it 
"may  involve;"  and  they  are  \varnel  '*  against  unduly 


A    PROTEST. ACTION    OF    1845    EQUIVOCAL.  393 

extending  this  plea  of  necessity,"  and  "  against  making  it 
a  cover  for  the  love  and  practice  of  slavery,  or  a  pretence 
for  not  using  eiforts  that  are  lawful  and  practicable  to 
extinguish  this  evil." 

A   PROTEST.— ACTION    OF    1845    EQUIVOCAL. 

By  what  vote  the  paper  of  1 849  passed,  we  do  not  know  ; 
undoubtedly  by  a  very  large  one,  as  we  find  a  protest  to 
the  action  recorded,  signed  by  only  four  members.  If 
this  expresses  the  full  strength  of  the  minority,  then  it 
presents  palpable  evidence  that  the  abatement  from  at  least 
some  of  "the  principles"  announced  in  1818  largely  per 
vaded  the  Church,  and  completely  overthrows  the  position 
taken  by  extremists  of  the  South  and  their  Northern  sym 
pathizers, — so  far  as  this  large  and  influential  body  of 
Christians  is  concerned,  spread  over  the  entire  country, — 
that  the  Church  is  mainly  responsible  for  "  abolitionizing 
the  country;"  for,  during  the  very  period  in  which  it  ia 
charged  that  abolition  was  growing,  so  as  to  extenuate  the 
crime  if  not  to  justify  the  South  in  ultimate  rebellion,  the 
Church  was  decidedly  more  "  conservative"  in  its  leaning 
towards  Southern  opinion,  and  far  more  lenient  towards 
its  members  for  their  neglect  of  what  was  deemed  a  solemn 
duty,  thirty  years  before,  concerning  the  whole  subject  of 
emancipation. 

This  protest  has  another  value  in  reference  to  the  ques 
tion  immediately  in  hand.  It  states  what  no  member  of 
the  Assembly  ventured  to  deny,  what  indeed  was  notorious, 
what  has  been  verified  to  the  last,  and  what  constituted 
the  ground  of  "  asking  the  Assembly  to  alter  sundry  terms 
and  passages  in  the  act  of  1845,"  viz. :  "  The  true  position 
of  our  Church,  in  regard  to  this  subject,  which  is  evidently 
one  of  overwhelming  importance,  is  not  known  with  cer 
tainty  either  by  all  its  ministers  or  members,  or  by  the 


391  THE  CHURCH  AND  SILVERY. 

world  at  large;  some  affirming  that  the  Church  sanctions 
slavery  as  an  institution  having  the  moral  approbation  of 
God  ;  and  others,  that  it  condemns  it." 

This  fact  is  as  clear  and  true  as  any  other  fact  before  the 
public  :  that  there  has  been  a  very  prevalent  opinion  in  the 
Church,  both  North  and  South, — the  South. rejoicing  in  it, 
a  portion  of  the  Northern  members  lamenting  it,  another 
portion  rejoicing  in  it  for  the  South's  sake,  and  others  con 
ceding  it  for  the  sake  of  peace, — that  the  paper  of  1845 
•was  a  large  concession  to  the  South  from  the  previous 
stand  taken  by  the  Church.  So  much  is  undeniable,  as  a 
simple  fact.  Now  it  would  be  quite  remarkable  if  all  thes^ 
classes  and  persons  were  mistaken  about  the  bearing  of 
that  paper.  It  would  be  equivalent  to  mistaking  their 
own  positive  convictions.  As  the  passage  of  the  Kansas- 
Nebraska  bill  was  regarded  as  a  political  triumph  to  th.1 
South  by  Southern  statesmen,  so  the  adoption  of  the  paper 
of  1845  was  hailed  as  an  ecclesiastical  triumph  by  South 
ern  divines.  This  ought  of  itself  to  be  conclusive.  An 
examination  of  the  document  shows  that  this  opinion  was 
well  founded. 

ACTION    OF    1861. SYNOD    OF    SOUTH    CAROLINA. 

Passing  by  the  action  of  1850,  the  next  in  the  order  of 
time,  in  which  the  Assembly  simply  declare  that  their 
"previous  and  repeated  declarations  are  such  as  to  render 
any  action  unnecessary,"  we  come  down  to  the  Assembly 
of  1861.  This  Assembly  made  no  formal  deliverance  upon 
slavery,  but  referred  certain  memorialists  "to  all  the  deli 
verances  of  the  General  Assembly  on  this  subject  from 
1818  to  the  present  time."  We  find,  however,  in  the  pro 
ceedings  of  this  Assembly,  proof  of  an  official  character 
that  the  Synod  of  South  Carolina  regarded  the  act  of  1818 
as  "virtually  rescinded"  by  the  act  of  1845.  This,  as  we 


ACTION    OF    1863. BEPUDIATION    OF    1845.  395 

have  said,  was  but  the  common  opinion  of  the  South.  The 
Synod  put  this,  in  form,  into  their  records,  and  this  decla 
ration  was  made  the  basis  of  an  exception  to  their  approval 
by  the  Assembly. 

ACTION    OF    1863. — REPUDIATION    OF    1845. 

The  next  action  upon  slavery  was  by  the  Assembly  of 
1863.  It  furnishes  the  most  incontrovertible  testimony  to 
the  position  which  we  have  maintained, — founded  in  the 
direct  and  formal  action  of  the  Assembly  itself, — that  a 
wide  difference,  in  their  judgment,  was  manifest  between 
the  acts  of  1818  and  1845.;  that,  in  fact,  the  latter  was  a 
concession  to  Southern  opinion,  or  an  abatement  from 
former  testimonies,  which  they  could  not  approve.  This 
Assembly  made  a  deliverance  upon  slavery  in  response  to 
"  a  request"  from  a  single  Presbytery  in  Illinois,  contain 
ing  but  eight  ministers.  Under  the  remarkable  circum 
stances  of  the  times,  when  slavery  had  demonstrated  its 
character  and  aims,  and  had  plunged  thirty  millions  of 
people  into  a  civil  war,  which  has  no  parallel  in  history, — 
then  raging  for  two  years, — all  for  the  purpose  of  "  per 
petuating  and  extending"  the  institution,  and  founding  a 
Government  of  which  it  should  be  the  "  corner  stone," — 
and  when  all  the  members  from  the  rebel  States  had  with 
drawn  from  the  Church,  so  that  the  members  in  the  loyal 
States  had  all  the  power  in  their  own  hands,' — the  utmost 
that  the  Assembly  of  1863  found  it  in  their  hearts  to  do, 
and  all  they  actually  did,  and  all  that  any  Presbytery  in 
the  whole  Church  requested  them  to  do,  and  that  too  a 
solitary  and  a  small  one,  was  to  "  reaffirm  the  testimony 
of  1818  ;"  simply  to  set  forth  anew  those  very  principles  in 
terms  on  which  their  fathers  had  planted  themselves  forty- 
five  years  before,  and  to  say  no  worse  things  of  the  system 
18 


396  THE    CHURCH    AND    SLAVERY. 

•which,  had  wrought  out  such  terrible  results  than  those 
venerated  men  had  authorized  by  their  example. 

Nor  was  the  action  of  1863  taken  "  unanimously,"  as  was 
that  of  1 81 8.  There  was  a  minority  of  several  votes  against 
it,  and  some  of  this  minority  were  from  the  free  States ; 
thus  showing,  that  even  in  the  midst  of  civil  war  caused 
by  slavery,  the  Church  in  the  loyal  States  was  not  as 
"radical"  as  were  the  fathers  of  the  Church  in  the  whole 
country  in  1818,  and  showing  therefore  the  utter  baseless 
ness  of  the  charge  that  the  rebellion  was  provoked  by 
"  abolitionizing  the  Church." 

Now  observe  how  the  Assembly  of  1863  regarded  the 
paper  of  1845.  They  say: 

The  Assembly  has,  from  the  first,  uttered  its  sentiments  on  the  sub 
ject  of  slavery  in  substantially  the  same  language.  The  action  of  1818 
was  taken  with  more  care,  made  more  clear,  full,  and  explicit,  and  was 
adopted  unanimously.  It  has  since  remained  that  true  and  Scriptural 
deliverance  on  this  important  subject,  by  which  our  Church  is  deter 
mined  to  abide.  It  has  never  been  repealed,  amended,  or  modified,  but 
lias  frequently  been  referred  to,  and  reiterated  in  subsequent  Assem 
blies.  And  when  some  persons  fancied  that  the  action  of  1845  in  some 
way  interfered  with  it,  the  Assembly  of  1846  declared,  with  much 
unanimity,  that  the  action  of  1845  was  not  intended  to  deny  or  rescind 
the  testimony  on  the  subject  previously  uttered  by  General  Assemblies ; 
and  by  these  deliverances  we  still  abide. 

This  is  rather  plain  language,  and  very  much  like  that 
of  1846,  from  which  alone  we  might  erroneously  be  led  to 
infer  that  they  regarded  the  paper  of  1845  "  substantially 
the  same"  in  its  principles  as  all  the  previous  deliverances. 
But  a  practical  test  as  to  whether  they  meant  this  was  at 
hand,  and  the  result  was  decisive.  In  the  last  words, 
which  were  a  clincher  to  the  whole  utterance,-.—"'  and  by 
these  deliverances  wre  still  abide," — some  ambiguity  might 
be  supposed  to  rest.  It  was  therefore  moved  to  insert  the 
word  "  all"  before  "  these,"  for  the  express  purpose  of 


REVIEW    OF   TESTIMONIES. — 1787    TO    1863.  397 

embracing  the  paper  of  1845.  The  minutes  record  this 
motion  "  lost."  It  was  then  "  moved  to  lay  the  whole  sub 
ject  on  the  table."  This  too  was  "  lost."  The  minutes 
say :  "  The  report  was  then  adopted,  without  amendment." 
No  clearer  testimony  than  this  could  well  be  given  that 
this  General  Assembly  did  not  regard  the  paper  of  1845 
with  favor ;  did  not  regard  it  as  agreeing  with  previous 
action.  No  other  explanation  can  be  given  for  voting- 
down  the  proposed  amendment.  They  did  not  wish,  in 
express  terms,  to  indorse  it,  as  they  did,  in  express  terms, 
indorse  the  paper  of  1818,  and  thus  to  include  it  among 
those  deliverances  by  which  they  declared  they  would 
"still  abide." 

REVIEW    OP   TESTIMONIES. 1787    TO    1863. 

We  have  now  brought  down  the  testimony  of  the  Pres 
byterian  Church  on  slavery  from  the  earliest  period  to  the 
action  of  the  Assembly  of  1863.  The  action  of  1864,  we 
shall  notice  in  its  place. 

This  is  among  the  largest  ecclesiastical  bodies  in  the 
United  States,  and,  until  the  outbreak  of  rebellion,  extended 
into  all  parts  of  the  country.  For  learning,  ability,  and 
influence,  its  ministers  and  its  people  stand  second  to  no 
denomination  of  Christians  in  the  country.  The  sentiments 
they  have  from  time  to  time  uttered  upon  slavery,  pro  and 
COM,  in  the  pulpit,  in  ecclesiastical  judicntories,  through 
their  religious  newspapers,  monthlies,  quarterlies,  and 
volumes  published, — and  they  have  spoken  frequently,  from 
the  hebdomadal  to  the  huge  octavo, — have  probably  had 
as  great  an  influence  in  forming  the  public  opinion  of  the 
country,  both  North  and  South,  upon  this  vexed  question, 
as  has  emanated  from  any  other  equal  .number  of  persons; 
and  we  believe  that  a  fair  criterion  of  these  sentiments,  at 
least  as  regards  those  persons  who  have  always  wielded 


398  THE    CHURCH    AND    SLAVERY. 

most  influence  in  the  denomination  (with  the  exception  of 
the  ultra  opinions  more  recently  adopted  in  the  extreme 
Soudi),  is  to  be  found  in  the  deliverances  of  its  supreme 
judicatory,  the  General  Assembly. 

What,  then,  in  the  main,  is  the  teaching  of  the  facts 
which  we  have  collated  from  all  these  official  sources,  upon 
the  question  immediately  in  hand  ?  It  is  substantially  and 
plainly  this  : 

1.  That  from  1787  to  1836,  or  about  fifty  years,  public 
testimony  was  borne  by  the  Presbyterian  Church  against 
slavery  as  a  system,  in  the  most  decided  terms,  the  most 
explicit  declaration  being  the  act  of  1818. 

2.  That  from  1836  to  the  period  of  the  rebellion  and  the 
withdrawal  of  the  Churches  in  the  rebel  States,  in  1861,  or 
about  twenty-five  years,   there   was  gradually  developed 
within  the  denomination    that  which    grew  into  a  more 
decided  proslavery  sentiment,  or,  to  use  a  favorite  term,  an 
intense  "  conservatism ;"  to  that  degree,  at  least,   which 
embraced  many  of  the  leading  minds  in  the  body,  and  other 
influential  classes  who  controlled  its  higher  judicatories; 
as  evidenced  particularly,  though  mildly  expressed,  in  the 
act  of  1845  ;  and  which,  during  this  period,  prevented  any 
contrary  action  by  the  General  Assembly,  though  certain 
individuals  and  Presbyteries  frequently  attempted  to  se 
cure  it. 

3.  That  during  the  former  period  of  fifty  years,  the  high 
est  judicatory  of  the  Presbyterian   Church  made  formal 
declaration,    six    specific   times,    or    in  each    deliverance 
enacted  during  the  period,  IN  FAVOR  OF  THE  "  ABOLITION 
OF  SLAVERY,"  and  urged  the   Churches  under  its  care  to 
labor  for  that  end,  viz.,  in  1787,  directly;  in  1793,  by  re- 
publishing  the  action  of  1787  ;  in  1795,  by  expressing  "the 
deepest  concern"  that  "  any  vestiges  of  slavery"  remained 
in  the  country;  in  1815,  directly ;  and  in  1818,  directly  and 


KEVIEW    OF   TESTIMONIES. — 1787    TO    1863.  399 

most  urgently  :  while,  on  the  other  hand,  during  the  second 
period  of  twenty-five  years,  NOT  ONCE  is  EMANCIPATION 
KECOMMENDED  IN  ANY  FORM,  nor  is  any  positive  disappro 
bation  whatever  expressed  of  the  system  ;  but  in  the  two 
more  extended  deliverances  of  this  period,  those  of  1845 
and  1849,  the  difficulties  of  emancipation  are  suggested, 
and  thus,  so  far  forth,  was  the  work  discouraged.  The 
paper  of  1845  urges  Christians  to  seek  "  the  repeal  of  unjust 
and  oppressive  laws,  and  the  amendment  of  such  as  are 
defective,"  but  sounds  no  note,  in  any  form  or  manner,  for 
emancipation. 

4.  That  after  the  rebellion  had  been  in  progress  two 
years,  in  1863,  when  the  Assembly  was  composed  of  per 
sons  from  the  loyal  States  only,  the  Church  simply  took 
its  stand  upon  the  platform  of  its  earlier  sentiment,  as  ex 
pressed  in  the  act  of  1818. 

5.  That  it  therefore  appears, — so  far  as  this  large,  extend 
ed,  and  influential  body  of  Christians  is  concerned, — that 
during  the  very  period  in  which  it  has  been  alleged  that 
the  Church  was  becoming  abolitionized,  and  the  country 
being  educated  up  to  a  point  of  opposition  to  slavery  which 
justified  or  extenuated  a,  disruption  of  the  Church  and  of 
the  Union,  the  contrary  sentiment  prevailed  and  the  con 
trary  action  was  taken  in  all  the  deliverances  of  the  highest 
court  of  this  body ;  arid  so  marked  and  decided  was  what 
was  termed  the  "healthy  conservatism"   of  this  period, 
operating  as  a  "  breakwater  against  abolitionism"  in  other 
quarters,  that  the  author  of  the  paper  of  1845  exultingly 
referred  to  it  "  as  constituting  our  Church  emphatically  the 
bond  of  union  to  these  United  States ;"  and  many  others 
no  doubt  believed  what  a  distinguished  millionnaire,  who 
in  writing  publicly  pledged  on  a  certain  contingency  a  hun 
dred  thousand   dollars  to  the  General  Assembly  in  1859, 
was  understood  to  express,  that  "  the  two  strongest  hoops 


400  THE    CHURCH    AND    SLATEEY. 

which  held  the  Union  together  were  the  Democratic  party 
and  the  Old  School  Presbyterian  Church." 

CORROBORATIVE    TESTIMONY    TO    THESE    POSITIONS. 

There  are  certain  special  facts  in  great  number  which 
might  be  produced,  further  illustrating  the  truth  of  the 
second  and  fifth  of  the  foregoing  points.  We  will  barely 
note  a  few  of  them. 

The  act  of  1818,  originally  passed,  as  has  been  stated, 
unanimously,  not  a  single  vote  being  cast  against  it  from 
the  remotest  South.  When  this  act  was  reaffirmed  in 
1863,  after  the  seceders  had  withdrawn,  and  there  were 
none  in  the  Assembly  but  from  the  loyal  States,  there  was 
a  minority  against  it ;  how  many,  we  do  not  know,  as  the 
ayes  and  noes  were  not  taken.  Nor  were  all  of  this 
minority  from  the  Border  slave  States.  Several  were  from 
different  parts  of  the  free  States.  This  is  significant.  The 
Church  was  not  as  decidedly  antislavery  even  in  1863,  in 
the  midst  of  the  rebellion,  as  in  1818. 

In  the  Assembly  of  1859,  a  resolution  was  offered  recom 
mending  the  American  Colonization  Society  to  the  patron 
age  of  the  Churches,  a  measure  that  had  been  passed  some 
dozen  times  before,  at  different  periods ;  but  now  it  was 
vehemently  opposed  by  Dr.  Thornwell  and  other  leading 
men  of  the  South,  on  the  ground  that  "  the  Church  is 
exclusively  a  spiritual  organization,  and  possesses  none  but 
spiritual  power,"  and  therefore  this  would  be  a  perversion 
of  her  functions.  Thus  the  very  mildest  possible  form  of 
expression  adverse  to  slavery, — even  if  there  was  intended 
any  thing  more  than  a  simple  approval  of  that  philan 
thropic  enterprise  on  its  own  merits, — could  not  be 
tolerated  by  Southern  men.  Tl  ;  argument  was,  that  this 
was  bringing  the  Church,  "  a  spiritual  body,"  to  commend 
a  "secular  enterprise,"  though  philanthropic, — a  new 


CORROBORATIVE    TESTIMONY.  401 

doctrine  in  the  Church, — and  the  purpose  was  believed  to 
be  to  erect  a  barricade,  in  this  restriction  of  the  Church's 
functions,  behind  which  slavery  should  ever  be  safe  from 
assault.* 

*  The  position  taken  in  the  Assembly  of  1859,  by  Dr.  Thormvell  and  other  Southern 
men,  referred  to  above,  was  pronounced  by  Dr.  Hodge,  in  the  Princeton  Review  for 
July  of  that  year,  a  "new  doctrine"  in  the  Church;  and  this  is  admitted,  also,  in  the 
Southern  Presbyterian  Review,  of  Columbia,  S.  C.,  for  October  of  that  year.  This 
"  new  doctrine"  is  again  referred  to  by  Dr.  Hodge,  in  the  same  periodical  for  July, 
1864.  On  reviewing  the  case  of  Dr.  McPheeters  before  the  General  Assembly,  he 
says :  u  We  think  Dr.  McPheeters  committed  som*  very  grave  mistakes,  which  were  the 
source  of  all  his  difficulties.  In  the  first  place,  he  adopted  the  new  exaggerated  doc 
trine  as  to  the  spirituality  of  tht  Church,  and  the  limited  range  of  her  prerogative  as 
a  teacher.  He  says  he  had  always  resisted  the  introduction  of  what  he  calls  '  polities' 
into  the  house  of  God,  and  on  this  ground  opposed  all  deliverances  on  the  part  of 
Church  courts  touching  the  present  rebellion,  and  the  introduction  into  the  services 
of  the  sanctuary  of  any  thing  which  implied  a  decided  opinion  as  to  the  controversy 
which  now  rends  the  country.  In  the  year  1859,  Dr.  Thorn  well  opposed  the  recom 
mendation  of  the  Colonization  Society,  on  the  principle  above  stated.  In  private, 
if  not  in  public,  he  took  the  ground  that  the  division  of  the  country  was  a  certain 
event.  [This  confirms  what  we  have  said  in  a  Note,  page  158,  of  Dr.  ThornweH's 
declaration  at  the  Assembly  at  Rochester,  in  May,  I860.]  He,  however,  wished  to 
prevent  the  division  of  the  Church  as  consequent  on  the  division  of  our  national 
Union.  To  secure  that  end,  he  said,  it  was  necessary  to  adopt  the  principle  that  the 
only  duty  of  the  Church  as  a  teacher,  was  to  preach  the  Gospel,  to  labor  for  the  salva 
tion  of  men.  He  said  in  his  public  speech  that  if  the  Government  choose  to  reopen 
the  slave-trade,  the  Church  would  have  no  right  to  open  her  lips  against  it.  This 
new  doctrine  excited  great  attention  and  feeling.  When  the  Assembly  met  in  1860, 
the  subject  was  again  brought  up,  and  caused  for  a  time  great  anxiety.  A  resolution 
was  prepared  and  presented  by  the  Committee  on  Bills  and  Overtures,  affirming  the 
directly  opposite  doctrine  [drafted  by  Dr.  Hodge],  and  asserting  that  the  Church,  as 
God's  witness  on  earth,  is  authorized  and  bound  to  reprove  all  sin  and  to  support 
all  truth  and  righteousness.  This  resolution  was  adopted  by  a  unanimous  vote  of 
the  Assembly.  *  *  *  Politics,  in  the  wide  sense  of  the  word,  includes  the  science 
of  Government,  the  policy  of  States,  and  the  duties  of  citizens.  The  plain  principle 
which  determines  the  legitimate  sphere  of  the  action  of  the  Church,  is,  that  it  is  limited 
to  teaching  and  enforcing  moral  and  religious  truth;  and  to  such  truth",  as  are 
revealed  and  determined  by  the  sacred  Scriptures.  The  Bible  gives  us  no  rule  for 
deciding  the  litigated  questions  about  public  improvements,  a  national  bank,  or  a 
protective  tariff,  or  State  rights.  But  it  does  give  us  rules  for  pronouncing  about 

SLAVE  LAWS,  TIIK  SLAVE-TRADE.  OBEDIENCE  TO  MAGISTRATES,  TREASON,  REBEL 
LION,  AND  REVOLUTION.  To  shut  her  mouth  on  these  questions,  is  to  make  her 
UNFAITHFUL  TO  HER  utoii  VOCATION.  The  authors  of  this  new  theory  soon  repu 
diated  it;  and  while  those  who  agreed  with  them  at  the  North  were  protesting 
against  Church  courts  saying  a  word  against  the  rebellion,  the  pulpits,  Conven 
tions,  Synods,  and  Assemblies,  at  the  South,  were  resounding  with  exciting  appeals 
to  inflame  the  spirit  of  rebellion.  "We  think  that  a  great  part  of  Dr.  McPheeters's 


402  THE    CHURCH    AND    SLAVERY. 

At  other  times,  a  portion  of  the  people  being  aware  that 
the  Presbyterian  Church,  so  far  as  the  manifestations  in 
her  highest  court  were  concerned,  had  been  for  a  long 
time  drifting  away  from  her  earlier  position,  desired  f <  r 
many  years  a  reaffirmation  in  direct  terms  of  the  act  of 
1818.  This  was,  in  some  instances,  proposed  to  the  As 
sembly  ;  it  was  discussed,  and  several  times  acted  upon, 
in  Presbyteries  and  Synods,  and  canvassed  in  religious 
journals ;  but  the  prevailing  influence  always  discounte 
nanced  such  reaffirmation,  and  it  is  believed  that  there  was 
but  one  religious  journal  in  the  Church  that  favored  it. 
At  the  same  time,  the  South  were  violently  opposed  to  its 
reaffirmation,  because  they  regarded  it  as  totally  erro 
neous.  Their  religious  journals  plainly  indicated  that  it 
would  be  the  signal  for  disruption.  It  could  scarcely  be 
tolerated  by  them  unrepealed ;  never  would  it  have  been, 
if  reaffirmed.  Southern  ministers  expressed  through 
Northern  journals  what  would  be  the  consequences  of  a 
re-enactment  of  the  paper  of  1818,  and  warned  the 
Northern  portion  of  the  Church  against  such  a  step. 
Many  at  the  South  declared  that  it  had  been  "  virtually 
repealed"  by  the  act  of  1845.  The  Synod  of  South  Caro 
lina  so  declared  by  formal  enactment.  Others  insisted 
that  the  act  of  1818  remained  on  the  record,  not  as  indi 
cating  the  Church's  present  judgment,  but  only  as  a  matter 
of  history,  showing  the  opinions  of  a  bygone  and  unen 
lightened  age  on  the  character  of  slavery.  The  men  of 

difficulties  have  arisen  from  his  adopting  a  principle  which  prevented  him  from 
uniting  with  his  brethren  in  CONDEMNING  THE  REBELLION."  Elsewhere,  Dr.  Hudge 
says,  of  the  duty  of  a  pastor,  when  speaking  of  the  case  of  Dr.  McPheeters  :  u  He  is 
the  organ  of  the  people  in  presenting  their  prayers  and  thanksgiving  to  God.  They 
have  the  right  to  have  their  hearts'  desires  for  their  country  brought  before  His  throne. 
If  the  pastor's  principles  or  feelings  prevent  him  from  doing  this;  if  he  cannot  pi  ay 
for  the  success  of  our  arms,  and  for  the  suppression  of  ike,  rebellion;  if  he. 
cannot  heartily  thank  God  for  the  victories  He  may  grant  our  armies,  he  cannot 
satisfy  the  just  demands  of  the  people." 


PROOF    AND    ILLUSTRATIONS.  403 

the  South  took  their  position  openly  and  defiantly  on  the 
ground  of  deeming  that  paper  as  teaching  a  totally  false 
doctrine  of  the  word  of  God. 

PROOF    AND    ILLUSTRATIONS. 

Let  us,  at  this  point,  give  the  proof  of  this.  It  is  found 
in  the  action  of  Southern  Church  judicatories,  and  in  their 
religious  journals  and  periodicals.  For  the  sake  of  greater 
brevity,  we  take  our  illustrations  chiefly  from  two  or  three 
sources  among  many. 

The  Southern  Presbyterian  Review  for  April,  1861, 
says :  "The  action  of  1818  still  stands  upon  her  records  (of 
the  General  Assembly),  not  as  the  law,  but  the  history 
of  the  subject  •  and  Southern  Presbyterians  are  well  con 
tent  that  it  should  so  stand."  This  Review,  conducted  by 
the  Professors  in  the  Theological  Seminary  which  was  sup 
ported  more  than  any  other  Seminary  by  the  Church  in  the 
Cotton  and  Gulf  States, — or  by  South  Carolina,  Georgia, 
Alabama,  Florida,  Louisiana,  Texas,  and  Mississippi, — may 
well  be  supposed  to  represent  the  general  sentiment  of  the 
Church  in  that  vast  region. 

The  Southern  Presbyterian,  a  weekly  religious  journal, 
which  was  also  deemed  to  represent  the  Church  in  several 
Synods  in  those  States,  thus  speaks,  in  several  successive 
numbers,  on  the  points  of  the  case  stated  : 

It  will  be  manifestly  impossible  for  the  Presbyterians  in  the  Confede 
rate  States  to  maintain  their  connection  with  those  in  the  United  States, 
whPe  the  position  of  the  latter  on  the  subject  of  slavery  is  dubious,  or 
if  it  is  the  fact  that  the  declarations  and  recommendations  of  the  Assembly 
of  1818  are  NOT  "virtually  repealed."  (Feb.  23,  1861-)  As  to  the  act 
of  1818,  I  agree  with  you,  1st.  That  much  of  its  language  could  not  be 
now  understood  except  in  an  abolition  sense.  2d.  That  it  could  not 
now  be  adopted,  or  authoritatively  delivered,  by  our  Church  united. 
(April  6,  1861.)  We  have  said  that  we  think  our  Northern  brethren 
owe  it  to  us,  candidly  and  explicitly,  to  let  us  know  what  are  THEIR 
18* 


404  THE    CHURCH    AND    SLAVERY. 

views  about  slavery,  and  especially  as  to  the  meaning  and  effect  of  the  act 
of  1818,  and  whether  or  not  it  has  been  virtually  repealed  or  reversed.     WE 
DO  THINK  so.     *     *     *     The  South  wants  no  action  at  all  on  the   part 
of  the  next  or  any  future  Assembly.      We  are  perfectly  contented  with 
the  position  of  the  Old  School  Presbyterian  Church  on  the   subject  of 
slavery.     The  Synod  of  South  Carolina  said  unanimously,  that  "  from  our 
brethren  of  the  whole  Church,  annually  assembled,  we  have   received 
nothing  but  justice  and  courtesy."     This  sentiment  is  not  peculiar  to 
the  South  Carolina   Synod,  but   is  the  sentiment,  we  suppose,  of  tJi.e  whole 
South.     There  is  no  danger,  therefore,  of  the  South  asking  for  the  repeal 
of  the  act  of  1818.     WHAT  THE  ASSEMBLY  SAID  IN  1845  SATISFIES  us. 
Southern  men  never  did  agitate  the   Assembly  on   this   subject — they 
never  were  the  unruly  spirits.     And  having  been  PERFECTLY  CONTENTED 
FOR  SIXTEEN  YEARS  with  the  position  of  the  Church,  why  should  they  now 
ask  for  any  change?     (April  13,  1861.)     We  have  further  said,  in  as  in 
telligible  terms  as  we  could,  that,  if  the  act  of  1818  is  to  be  regarded  as 
NOW  the  "  opinion,"  or  the  faith,  or  the  law,  of  the  Presbyterian  Church 
in  the  United  States,  it  would  be  IMPOSSIBLE  for  the  Presbyterians  in  the 
Confederate  States  to  bear  it;    and  that  we  thought  it  due  to  the  South 
that  we  should  not  be  left  in  any  uncertainty  on  this  point.      *      *      * 
It  has  been  the  impression  of  the  South  that  this  act  had  been  virtually 
reversed  by  subsequent  decisions  of  the  Assembly.     So  the  Synod  of  South 
Carolina   affirmed   last   December.     Under   this   impression,   Southern 
Presbyterians  have  been  content  and  quiet,  believing  that  our  Northern 
brethren  held  correct  and  Scriptural  views  on  tJie  subject.     It  has  been  our 
joy  and  pride  to  think  that  the  errors  of  our  fathers  had  been  corrected, 
and  the  minds  of  Northern   Presbyterians  kept  pure  from  the  follies 
of  modern  abolitionists.     The  act  of  1818  was  regarded  in  the  South  as 
only   the  opinion  of  the  men  composing  the  Assembly  then  in  session, 
and  not  as  the  authoritative  permanent  judgment  of  the   Presbyterian 
Church.     *    *    *    THE  ACT  OF  1845  WAS  SUPPOSED  BY  THE  SOUTH  TO 
BE  A  DECISION  IN  OUR  FAVOR.     *     *     *     If  this  is  not  so,  then  we  hesi 
tate  not  to  say  that  Southern  Presbyterians  have  been  MISLED  AND  BE 
TRAYED.     *     *     *     In  our  humble  opinion,  any  Church  in  these  Con 
federate  States  that  affiliates  with  those  who  maintain  the  act  of  1818, 
*     *     *     will,  in  a  very  little  while,  find  themselves  in  a  position  where 
they  will  have  abundance  of  reason  for  repentance.     *     *     *     We  are 
aware  that  certain  schemers  and  wire-workers  in  our  ecclesiastical  affairs 
at  the  North,  are  making  diligent  use  of  their  peculiar  opportunities  and 
special  talents  in  that  line,  to  engineer  the  Southern  part  of  the  Church 


NORTHERN    RESPONSIBILITY.  405 

into  quiescence;  BUT  THEY  WILL  FAIL,  and  must  meet,  the  fate  which  in 
variably  awaits  those  who  resort  to  such  methods  to  secure  selfish  ends 
(April  27,  1861.) 

Here,  then,  is  the  most  incontestable  proof, — in  the 
judgment  of  those  who  were  most  deeply  interested  in 
the  subject  as  a  practical  matter, — that  the  Church  had 
swerved  from  her  ancient  position,  and  substantially  in 
dorsed,  or  at  least  tacitly  acquiesced  in,  the  Southern  views  ; 
that  she  had  repudiated  the  doctrines  of  1818  by  the  act 
of  1845;  and  therefore  the  whole  South  had  "been  per 
fectly  contented  for  sixteen  years  with  the  position  of  the 
Church." 

THE    INEVITABLE    EFFECT. NORTHERN    RESPONSIBILITY. 

The  men  of  the  South  were  undoubtedly  honest  and 
sincere  in  this  judgment  of  where  the  Church  stood.  The 
acts  in  question,  which  they  compared,  sustained  them. 
Their  relations  to  the  subject,  as  affecting  their  position 
at  home,  would  not  lead  them  to  over-eagerness  in  adopt 
ing  such  an  opinion ;  but  would  naturally  lead  them  in  an 
opposite  direction,  unless  they  felt  sure  of  their  ground 
and  of  their  friends.  We  can  somewhat,  therefore,  enter 
into  their  surprise  when  assured,  in  the  winter  of  1861,  from 
the  atmosphere  of  Chicago,  that,  after  all,  the  acts  of  1818 
and  1845  were  in  sentiment  the  same  !  "  The  act  of  1818 
was  regarded  in  the  South"  (says  The  Southern  Pres 
byterian,  of  April  27,  1861)  "only  as  the  opinion  of  the 
men  composing  the  Assembly  then  in  session,  and  not  as 
the  authoritative  permanent  judgment  of  the  Presbyterian 
Church."  But,  "  we  are  now  told,  howrever,  that  the  later 
deliverances  of  the  Assembly  on  this  subject  are  not  to  be 
understood  as  differing  from  that  and  preceding  decisions. 
No  less  authority  than  Dr.  N.  L.  Rice,  who  has  been  re 
garded  in  the  South  as  our  BEST  FRIEND  AT  THE  NORTH- 


406  THE    CHURCH    AND    SLAVEIIY. 

and  who,  if  we. mistake  not,  drew  up  the  act  of  1845,  which 
was  supposed  by  the  South  to  be  a  decision  in  our  favor, 
tells  us  that  we  must  not  interpret  that  as  reversing  former 
acts." 

In  all  the  seriousness  and  fervor  of  our  condemnation  of 
the  wicked  deeds  of  the  Southern  clergy  in  bringing  on 
the  rebellion,  we  confess  to  some  sympathy  for  men  under 
the  circumstances  in  which  this  Northern  blast  found  them, 
when,  counting  on  the  support  of  their  quondam  friends, 
they  had  possibly  gone  too  far  to  retreat  with  safety.  We 
can  imagine  something  of  the  bitterness  of  anguish  with 
which  the  pen  traced  the  words,  founded  on  the  assurance 
of  the  identity  in  sentiment  of  these  acts  by  the  author  of 
the  latter  :  "  If  this  is  so,  then  we  hesitate  not  to  say,  that 
Southern  Presbyterians  have  been  misled  and  betrayed" 

But,  so  far  as  the  responsibility  for  the  position  of  the 
Church  is  concerned,  as  this  position  was  understood  uni 
versally  at  the  South,  the  Church  herself  must  bear  it ; 
while,  unquestionably,  the  leaders  of  the  Church,  in  her 
courts,  and  in  other  posts  of  influence  where  her  public 
sentiment  is  manufactured  or  reflected,  have  the  chief  bur 
den  on  their  shoulders.  There  were  those  who  remonstrated 
against  this  position  which  the  South  claimed  the  Church 
to  have  taken,  but  they  were  always  overruled;  Southern 
influences  under  Northern  compliance  dominated;  a  re- 
assertion  of  her  early  testimonies  was  impossible ;  men 
who  were  dissatisfied  with  her  position,  found  effort  use 
less,  and  were  content  to  bide  their  time  ;  and  thus  the 
Church  stood  for  "  sixteen  years  ;"  and  now,  as  the  result 
of  this,  and  corresponding  influences  at  work  in  the  State, 
Ave  are  daily  "  making  history,"  in  deeds  which  crimson  a 
hundred  battle-fields  with  patriot  gore ! 

We  have  a  very  decided  opinion  on  this  whole  subject, 
and  we  have  very  little  concern  whether  it  be  deemed  wise 


NORTHERN    RESPONSIBILITY.  407 

or  otherwise  by  the  responsible  actors  in  the  case.  It  is 
well  supported  by  the  facts,  and  by  the  acknowledged  prin 
ciples  of  human  nature  everywhere  prevalent. 

Looking  at  matters  from  the  stand-point  of  the  rebellion 
and  several  years  previous  to  it,  so  far  from  the  position 
of  the  Church  during  this  second  period  mentioned,  or  from 
about  1836  to  1861, — a  position  of  departure  from  the  tes 
timony  of  the  fathers,  and  to  which  the  Church  has  since 
returned, — being  a  cause  for  exultation,  as  it  has  been  with 
some,  it  is  with  us  the  reverse.  So  far  from  this  position 
having  contributed,  as  the  distinguished  author  of  the 
paper  of  1845  and  his  distinguished  friend  believed,  to  hold 
the  Union  together,  it  is  a  solemn  judgment  to  which  a 
large  portion  of  the  people  have  arrived,  that  such  conces 
sions  by  the  Church,  and  similar  concessions  by  the  civil 
authorities,  only  hastened  its  disruption.  To  u^e  a  well- 
understood  illustration,  the  leaders  of  Southern  opinion,  in 
both  Church  and  State,  had  become  like  spoiled  children. 
The  repeated  concessions  of  Northern  politicians,  yielding 
the  principles  held  by  the  fathers  of  the  Republic,  made 
Southern  politicians  more  exorbitant  in  their  demands, 
until  they  came  to  believe  that  verily  the  whole  country 
was  theirs.  The  repeated  concessions  of  the  Northern 
Church,  Culminating  in  the  Presbyterian  body  in  1845  and 
sticking  there  immovably  under  all  remonstrances,  pro 
duced  a  similar  state  of  mind  in  Southern  divines.  If  both 
classes  had  stood  firmly,  during  all  our  history,  by  the 
teachings  of  the  fathers,  and  to  which  the  mass  of  both  in 
the  North  have  since  returned,  the  rebellion  never  would 
have  occurred.* 

*  If  Presbyterians  of  the  Old  School  Church  desire  to  know  THE  CAUSE  of  the  with 
drawal  of  the  Southern  Presbyteries  and  Synods,  and  of  the  formation  of  the  "  Gen 
eral  Assembly  of  the  Confederate  States  of  America,'1'1  in  December,  1861.  they  may 
find  evidence  which  is  conclusive  that  THE  TRADERS  of  the  Church  in  the  South  were 
not  led  to  thisntepby  the  action  of  the  General  A**embly  at  Philadelphia  in  May, 


408  THE    CHUBCH    AND   SLAVERY, 

ACTION    OF    THE    GENERAL    ASSEMBLY    OF    1864. 

We  come  now  to  the  last  exhibition  of  sentiment  on 
the  subject  of  slavery,  made  by  the  General  Assembly  of 
the  Presbyterian  Church  in  the  United  States.  It  is  the 

1861,  upon  the  state  of  the  country.  They  had  taken  their  position  MONTHS  BEFOBK 
THAT  ASSEMBLY  MET,  and  had  determined  on  a  division  of  the  Church  in  consequence 
of  the  course  of  things  in  the  State,'  thus  chaining  the  Church  of  Christ  to  Csesar'a 
war  chariot.  While,  therefore,  it  may  be  true,  as  Dr.  Hodge  says  of  Dr.  Thorn  well, 
in  a  previous  note  (page  401),  that  in  1859,  "he  wished  to  prevent  the  division  of  the 
Church  as  consequent  upon  the  division  of  our  national  Union"  subsequent  facts 
show,  as  will  be  soen,  that  after  the  Presidential  election  of  1860,  and  during  the 
winter  of  1861.  the  leaders  of  the  Church  in  the  South  (and  Dr.  Thorn  well,  beyond  a 
doubt,  among  them)  took  other  ground,  and  determined  on  a  disruption  of  the 
Church,  "as  consequent  upon"  what  had  then  taken  place  in  the  "secession"  of  sev 
eral  States.  It  may  be  further  true,  that  the  reason  why  the  "resolution"  presented 
by  Dr.  Hodge  in  the  General  Assembly  of  I860  (declaring  contrary  to  the  "new" 
Thorn  well  theory  of  the  power  of  the  Church),  "  was  adopted  by  a  unanimous  vote." — 
even  Dr.  Thornwell  not  voting  against  it, — was,  because  the  leaders  had  at  that  early 
day  determined  to  divide  the  Church  if  the  Union  should  be  divided;  and  that  thejr 
expected  the  latter  event  to  occur  beyond  doubt,  is  seen  in  what  Dr.  Thornwell  and 
others  said  at  the  Assembly  in  I860,  as  stated  in  a  previous  chapter  (Note,  page  158). 
The  facts  which  show  the  disruption  on  that  ground  are  (1.)  Several  Presbyteries 
that  had  already  appointed  commissioners  to  the  Assembly  at  Philadelphia,  called, 
in  April  and  May,  special  meetings  and  revoked  these  appointments.  Notices  of 
those  meetings  and  of  their  action  are  found  in  Southern  religious  papers  that  are 
now  before  us.  Some  Presbyteries,  and  those  from  the  extreme  South, — as  from 
Mississippi,  Louisiana,  and  Texas,  and  other  points  most  remote  from  Philadelphia, 
— were  represented;  proving  conclusively  that  it  was  not  the,  apprehension  of  war 
which  necessarily  kept  members  away.  Many  in  Virginia,  the  Carolinas,  Georgia, 
and  other  less  remote  points,  did  not  attend  because  their  commissions  had  been 
revoked,  or  they  were  persuaded  by  those  who  lead  the  Church  not  to  go.  (2.)  The 
unstinted  abuse  which  the  Southern  religious  press  heaped  upon  Southern  Commis 
sioners  who  did  sit  in  that  Assembly,  is  another  item  of  proof  of  the  foregone  deter 
mination  for  division.  The  speeches  and  the  votes  of  these  men  againdt  the  Spring 
resolutions,  did  not  shield  them  from  abuse.  They  "  should  not  have  appeared  there 
at  all"  these  papers  declared.  Did  space  permit,  we  might  verify  this  by  quotations- 
(3.)  The  fact  that  the  Synod  of  South  Carolina  sent  up  its  records  for  review,  is  no 
proof  of  a  willingness  still  to  continue  ecclesiastically  connected  with  the  North. 
They  had  not  been  sent  for  /several  years ;  and  there  is  ample  ground  for  believing 
that  the  motive  for  then  sending  them  was  to  draw  forth  from  the  Assembly  just  the 
action  it  took,  viz. :  a  disapproval  of  the  Synod's  action,  declaring  the  act  of  181S 
on  slavery  "virtually  repealed."  This  was  an  anrument  the  Synod  wished  to  use 
''  to  fire  the  Southern  heart."  (4.)  In  The  Southern  Presbyterian  of  April  27, 1861,  is 
an  editorial  on  "  Division  of  the  Presbyterian  Church,"  published  almost  a  full  month 
be-fore  the  Assembly  met.  The  editor  says:  "We  have  plainly  and  unequivocally 


ACTION    OF    1864.  409 

report  drawn  up  by  the  Hon.  Stanley  Matthews,  of  Cin 
cinnati,  and  presented  by  him  to  the  Assembly,  from  the 
Committee  to  whom  the  subject  was  referred,  and  was 

expressed  our  conviction  (in  previous  numbers  of  this  paper),  that  a  separate  eccle 
siastical  organization  of  the  Southern  Presbyterian  Church  will  be  desirable  find 
necessary.''''  "  As  to  the  future  relations  between  Northern  and  Southern  Presby 
terians,  ecclesiastically,  we  have  no  doubt  of  the  issue,  and  are  very  well  content  to 
let  things  take  their  course.  We  do  not  think  it  necessary  or  expedient  to  say  or  do 
any  thing  to  hasten  the  inevitable  result."  "In  the  Assembly  which  will  meet  in 
Philadelphia  on  the  16th  of  next  month,  we  suppose  there  will  be  scarcely  one  com 
missioner  from  the  Southern  States.  If  any  such  appear  there,  we  are  convinced  it 
will  not  be  with  the  approbation  of  their  constituents.'''1  Still  earlier  than  this  (April 
6,  1861),  in  an  article  on  "The  next  General  Assembly,"  the  same  paper  shows  that 
the  "SECESSION  OF  THE  SOUTII"  was  "THE  reason"  urged  by  the  leaders  for  a  division 
of  the  Church,  as  follows:  "Every  thing  we  have  seen  and  heard  against  a  division 
of  the  Church,  in  consequence  of  the  secession  of  the  South,  proceeds  on  the  assump 
tion  that  such  division  is  desired  and  .proposed  on  the  ground  of  the  abolition  send 
inents  of  Northern  Presbyterians.  We  would  again  most  earnestly  protest  against 
this.  We  do  not  know  ANY  ONE  who  desires  a  division  of  the  Church  ON  THAT  GROUND. 
The  existence  of  a  few  out-and-out  abolitionists  in  ihe  Church  at  the  North,  and  the 
radically  unsound  views  of  the  majority  of  our  brethren  there  on  the  slavery  question, 
will  be  a  reason  to  reconcile  us  to  a  separation  from  them  ;  but  it  is  a  narrow  and 
a  shallow  notion  to  suppose-  that  is  the  reason  (editor's  italics)  which  will  make  such 
separation  desirable  and  NECESSARY."  Still  earlier  (March  80,  1861),  the  same  paper 
says:  "We  do  not  know  any  one  who  favors  a  separate  organization  of  the  Church 
in  the  Confederate  States,  either  on  account  of  the  act  of  the  Assembly  of  1818,  or  of 
any  other  action  of  the  Presbyterian  Church  in  the  United  States,  or  of  the  views  of 
our  Northern  brethren  in  general  on  the  slavery  question.  So  far  as  we  are  aware, 
those  who  think  such  an  organization  will  finally  be  best,  and  even  necessary,  form 
their  judgment  on  OTHER  REASONS  than  thtse  altogether."  We  have  seen  what 
those  "other  reasons"  are, — "the  secession  of  the  South," — from  the  extracts  given 
above  from  papers  of  a  later  date,  where  they  speak  out  what  in  March  they  did 
not  "  think  aloud"  quite  so  plainly. 

It  is  thus  conclusively  established  that  the  leader*, — the  men  who  had  so  much 
power  over  both  Church  and  State, — had  determined  on  ecclesiastical  separation 
MONTHS  BEFORE  the  Assembly  met;  and,  also,  WEEKS  BEFORE  the  attack  on  Fort 
Sumter;  and  "THE  REASON"  for  this  was,  "the  secession  of  the  South."  These 
rulers  in  the  Church  thus  made  her  a  tail  to  the  State,  in  her  ecclesiastical  organ 
ization;  while, personally,  they  led  both  Church  and  State  into  "secession"  at  the 
start.  They  did  not,  at  that  period,  deem  the  act  of  1818,  nor  "the  radically  unsound 
views  of  the  majority"  of  their  brethren  at  the  North  "on  the  slavery  question,"  aa 
"TIIK  reason"  for  division;  for,  the  States  having  "seceded,"  every  thing  "on  the 
slaKtty  question"1  would  be  safe,  of  course.  They  therefore  openly  put  the  division 
of  the  Church  on  the  ground  of  the  political  secession  of  the  South.  (5.)  In  view 
of  the  facts  above  given,  the  "Confederate  General  Assembly,"  by  the  pen  of  Dr. 
Thornwell,  in  their  Address  to  the  Christian  world,  justifying  their  separation  from 
the  Northern  branch  of  the  Church,  "unanimously"  perpetrate  a  serious  libel  upon 


410  THE   CHURCH   AND   SLAVERY. 

adopted  by  the  Assembly,  at  Newark,  New  Jersey,  in 
May  last. 

It  gives  an  historical  sketch  of  the  earlier  deliverances 
of  the  Church  on  this  subject,  opening  in  these  words  : 

In  the  opinion  of  the  General  Assembly,  the  solemn  and  momentous 
circumstances  of  our  times,  the  state  of  our  country,  and  the  condition 
of  our  Church,  demand  a  plain  declaration  of  its  sentiments  upon  tha 
question  of  slavery,  in  view  of  its  present  aspects  in  this  country. 
From  the  earliest  period  of  our  Church,  the  General  Assembly  de 
livered  unequivocal  testimonies  upon  this  subject,  which  it  will  be 
profitable  now  to  reaffirm. 

As  we  have  already  given  in  this  chapter  a  summary 
of  these  earlier  testimonies,  we  omit  from  the  report  its 
historical  sketch,  and  give  in  full  the  remaining  portion, 
in  which  the  doctrines  of  the  Assembly,  asserted  at  the 
present  time  are  embodied.  It  is  as  follows  : 

Such  were  the  early  and  unequivocal  instructions  of  our  Church.  It 
is  not  necessary  too  minutely  to  inquire  how  faithful  and  obedient  to 
these  lessons  and  warnings  those  to  whom  they  were  addressed  have 
been.  It  ought  to  be  acknowledged  that  we  have  all  much  to  confess 
and  lament  as  to  our  short-comings  in  this  respect.  Whether  a  strict 

the  truth,  when,  referring  to  the  action  upon  the  Spring  resolutions  in  the  Assembly 
of  May,  1861,  they  present  that  action  as  "  the  first  thing"  which  led  them  seriously  to 
contemplate  separation.  They  say:  "  The  first  thing  which  roused  our  Presbyteries 
to  look  the  question  of  separation  seriously  in  the  face,  was  the  course  of  the  Assem 
bly  in  venturing  to  determine,  as  a  court  of  Christ,  which  it  did  by  necessary 
implication,  the  true  interpretation  of  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States  as  to 
the  kind  of  Government  it  intended  to  form."  Did  not  the  "  Presbyteries"  of 
the  South  "look  the  question  of  separation  seriously  in  the  face,"  when  they  helj 
special  meetings  for  the  purpose  of  revoking  the  commissions  given  to  attend 
the  Assembly,  and  when  they  did  revoke  them  weeks  before  the  Assembly  met? 
The  "  Confederate  General  Assembly"  knew  these  things  were  so.  and  knew, 
m  ireover,  that  the  leaders  h  .d  declared  for  "separation"  even  long  before;  and 
yet  they  "unanimously"  try  to  deceive  the  world  by  declaring  the  contrary.  This, 
we  suppose,  forms  an  element  in  the  "  manly  Christian  logic"'  of  this  Address  of  tbe 
"  Confederate  General  Assembly,"  by  reason  of  which  its  Louisville  indorsers  sa 
warmly  commend  it  to  their  readers,  when  they  say  with  equal  truth  that  it  was 
"the  fatal  heresy  of  the  late  General  Assembly  (of  1861),  in  the  unscriptural  assump 
tion  of  power  in  ecclesiastical  courts  over  civic  and  political  questions,"  which 
"  caused  the  rending  of  the  Church," 


ACTION    OF    1864.  411 

and  careful  application  of  this  advice  would  have  rescued  the  country 
from  the  evil  of  its  condition,  and  the  dangers  which  have  since  threat 
ened  it,  is  known  to  the  Omniscient  alone.  Whilst  we  do  not  believe  • 
that  the  present  judgments  of  our  Heavenly  Father  and  Almighty  and 
Righteous  Governor  have  been  inflicted  solely  in  punishment  for  our 
continuance  in  THIS  SIN  ;  yet  it  is  our  judgment  that  the  recent  events 
of  our  history,  and  the  present  condition  of  our  Church  and  country, 
furnish  manifest  tokens  that  the  time  has  at  length  come,  in  the  providence 
of  God,  when  it  is  His  will  that  every  vestige  of  human  slavery  among  us 
should  be  effaced,  and  that  every  Christian  man  should  address  himself 
with  industry  and  earnestness  to  his  appropriate  part  in  the  performance 
of  this  great  duty. 

"Whatever  excuses  for  its  postponement  may  heretofore  have  existed, 
no  longer  avail.  When  the  country  was  at  peace  within  itself,  and 
the  Church  was  unbroken,  many  consciences  were  perplexed,  in  the 
presence  of  this  great  evil,  for  the  want  of  an  adequate  remedy. 
Slavery  was  so  formidably  intrenched  behind  the  ramparts  of  personal 
interests  and  prejudices,  that  to  attack  it  with  a  view  to  its  speedy 
overthrow,  appeared  to  be  attacking  the  very  existence  of  the  social 
order  itself,  and  was  characterized  as  the  inevitable  introduction  of  an 
anarchy  worse  in  its  consequences  than  the  evil  for  which  it  seemed 
to  be  the  only  cure.  But  the  folly  and  weakness  of  men  have  been  the 
illustrations  of  God's  wisdom  and  power.  Under  the  influence  of  the 
most  incomprehensible  infatuation  of  wickedness,  those  who  were  most 
deeply  interested  in  the  perpetuation  of  slavery  have  taken  away  every 
motive  for  its  further  toleration.  The  spirit,  of  American  slavery,  not 
content  with  its  defences  to  be  found  in  the  laws  of  the  States,  the 
provisions  of  the  Federal  Constitution,  the  prejudices  in  favor  of  exist 
ing  institutions,  and  the  fear  of  change,  has  taken  arms  against  law, 
organized  a  bloody  rebellion  against  the  National  Authority,  made 
formidable  war  upon  the  Federal  Union,  and-  in  order  to  found  an 
empire  upon  the  corner-stone  of  slavery,  threatens  not  only  our  exist 
ence  as  a  people,  but  the  annihilation  of  the  principles  of  free  Christian 
Government ;  and  thus  has  rendered  the  continuance  of  negro  slavery 
incompatible  with  the  preservation  of  our  own  liberty  and  inde 
pendence. 

In  th?  struggle  of  the  nation  for  existence  against  this  powerful  and 
wicked  treason,  the  highest  executive  authorities  have  proclaimed  the 
abolition  of  slavery  within  most  of  the  rebel  States,  and  decreed  its 
extinction  by  military  force.  They  have  enlisted  those  formerly  held 


412  THE    CIIUECH    AND    SLAVERY. 

as  slaves  to  be  soldiers  in  the  national  armies.  They  have  taken 
measures  to  organize  the  labor  of  the  freednien,  and  instituted  measures 
.  for  their  support  and  government  in  their  new  condition.  It  is  the 
President's  declared  policy  not  to  consent  to  the  reorganization  of  civil 
government  within  the  seceded  States  upon  any  other  basis  than  that 
of  emancipation.  In  the  loyal  States  where  slavery  has  not  been 
abolished,  measures  of  emancipation,  in  different  stages  of  progress, 
have  been  set  on  foot,  and  are  near  their  consummation  ;  and  proposi 
tions  for  an  amendment  to  the  Federal  Constitution,  prohibiting  slavery 
in  all  the  States  and  Territories,  are  now  pending  in  the  national  Con 
gress.  So  that,  in  our  present  situation,  the  interests  of  peace  and  of 
social  order  are  identified  with  the  success  of  the  cause  of  emancipation. 
The  difficulties  which  formerly  seemed  insurmountable,  in  the  provi 
dence  of  God,  appear  now  to  be  almost  removed.  The  most  formidable 
remaining  obstacle,  we  think,  will  be  found  to  be  the  unwillingness  of 
the  human  heart  to  see  and  accept  the  truth  against  the  prejudices  of 
habit  and  of  interest,  and  to  act  towards  those  who  have  heretofore 
been  degraded  as  slaves,  with  the  charity  of  Christian  principle  in  the 
necessary  efforts  to  improve  and  elevate  them. 

In  view,  therefore,  of  its  former  testimonies  upon  the  subject,  the 
General  Assembly  does  hereby  devoutly  express  its  gratitude  to 
Almighty  God  for  having  overruled  the  wickedness  and  calamities  of 
the  rebellion,  so  as  to  work  out  the  deliverance  of  our  country  from  the 
EVIL  AND  GUILT  of  slavery ;  its  earnest  desire  for  the  extirpation  of 
slavery,  as  the  root  of  bitterness  from  which  has  sprung  rebellion,  war, 
and  bloodshed,  and  the  long  list  of  horrors  that  follow  in  their  train : 
its  earnest  trust  that  the  thorough  removal  of  this  prolific  source  of 
evil  and  harm  will  be  speedily  followed  by  the  blessings  of  our 
Heavenly  Father,  the  return  of  peace,  union,  and  fraternity,  and 
abounding  prosperity  to  the  whole  land;  and  recommend  to  all  in  our 
communion  to  labor  honestly,  earnestly,  and  unweariedly,  in  their 
respective  spheres,  for  this  glorious  consummation,  to  which  human 
justice,  Christian  love,  national  peace  and  prosperity,  every  earthly 
and  every  religious  interest,  combine  to  pledge  them.* 

*  It  must  be  confessed  that  there  is  point  and  force  in  the  biting  sarcasm  which 
flowed  from  the  pen  of  Dr.  Thornwell,  and  was  "  unanimously1"  uttered  by  the 
"Confederate  General  Assembly"1  in  their  Address  to  tV>  Christian  world,  when, 
after  expressing  satisfaction  with  the  act  of  1845,  to  which  they  refer  in  the  first  part 
of  the  following  extract,  they  then  speak  in  the  latter  part  of  the  prevalent  sentiment 
of  the  North  and  the  actual  condition  of  "  the  Northern  section"  of  the  Church  : 


FEATURES  OF  THIS  REPOKT.  413 


FEATURES    OF    THIS    REPORT. 

We  have  already  occupied  so  much  space  with  the  gen 
eral  subject  of  this  chapter,  that  our  observations  upon 
this  report  ought  to  be  brief.  A  few  things,  however, 
call  for  special  notice. 

1.  It  elicited  an  animated  and  somewhat  protracted  dis- 
cassion,  which  was  opened  by  Judge  Matthews,  and  par 
ticipated  in  by  many  members,  among  them  some  of  the 
more  distinguished  in  the  Assembly,  both  in  the  ministry 
and   eldership.     After  full  consideration,  it  was  adopted 
with  great  unanimity  ;  some  reports  of  the  religious  press 
said  at  the  time,  "  unanimously,"  but  others  report  "  two  or 
three  faint  noes"  heard.     These  were  supposed  to  be  from 
some  of  the  Border  slave  States. 

2.  The  historical  sketch  given  of  previous  deliverances, 
specifies  tho'«  running  from  the  earliest,  1787,  down  to 
that  of  181>\  and  from  the  latter  extended  extracts  are 
embodied  ;  but  not  the  remotest  allusion  is  made  to  the  far- 

deliverance  of  1845  !     This  is  not  at  all  remark- 


"Tho  Presbyterian  Church  in  the  United  States  has  been  enabled,  by  divine  grace, 
to  pursue  for  the  most  part  an  eminently  conservative,  because  a  thoroughly  Scrip 
tural,  policy  in  relation  to  this  delicate  question.  It  has  planted  itself  upon  the  word 
of  God,  and  dtterly  refused  to  make  slaveholdinga  term  of  communion.  But  though 
both  sections  are  agreed  as  to  this  general  principle,  it  is  not  to  be  disguised  that  the 
North  cherishes  a  deep  and  settled  antipathy  to  slavery  itself,  while  the  South  is 
equally  sections  in  its  defence.  Recent  events  can  have  no  other  effect  than  to  con 
firm  the  antipathy  on  the  one  hand,  and  strengthen  the  attachment  on  the  other. 
The  Northern  section  of  the  Church  stands  in  the  awkward  predicament  of  main 
taining  in  one  breath  that  slavery  is  an  evil  which  ought  to  be  abolished,  and  of 
asserting  in  the  next  that  it  is  not  a  sin  to  be  visited  by  exclusion  from  the  commu 
nion  of  the  saints.  The  consequence  is,  that  it  play*  partly  into  the  hands  of  abo 
litionists,  and  partly  into  the  hands  of  slaveholder*,  and  weakens  its  influence 
with  both.  It  occupies  the  position  of  a  prevaricating  witness,  whom  neither  party 
will  trust.  It  would  be  better,  therefore,  for  the  moral  power  of  the  Northern  section 
of  the  Church,  to  get  entirely  quit  of  the-  subject."  Whllo  we  admit  the  pointedness 
of  this  >arcasm,  we  abjure  the  strange  logic  of  one  who  prided  himself  on  his  logical 
power,  that  every  "evil"  which  ought  to  be  removed  from  among  men,  should 
neccssarilvbe  made  a  term  of  communion  in  the  Church. 


414  THE    CHURCH    AND    SLAVERY. 

able,  but  it  is  very  significant.  Were  there  none  so  poor 
in  the  Assembly  as  to  do  that  famous  paper  reverence  ? 
Its  distinguished  author  was  there.  He  of  course  took 
part  in  the  discussion.  He  of  course,  as  always  hereto 
fore,  eulogized  the  work  of  his  hands.  He  suggested 
some  verbal  modifications  of  the  report,  as  did  one  or  two 
others,  and  they  were  promptly  and  cheerfully  accepted 
by  the  chairman  of  the  committee  ;  but  nobody  moved  to 
insert  a  eulogy,  or  even  an  elegy,  upon  the  deliverance  of 
1845,  the  paper  with  which  the  whole  South  had  been 

"  PERFECTLY    CONTENTED    FOR    SIXTEEN    YEARS  !"       This  is 

indeed  significant ;  it  conveys  an  unmistakable  lesson,  and 
fully  bears  out  the  view  we  have  already  taken  of  this 
paper  in  previous  pages. 

3.  This  report  takes  a  position  upon  slavery,  so  far  as 
terms  are  concerned, — and  we  suppose  these  terms  mean 
what  they  say, — which  no  other  deliverance  has  ever 
taken.  It  speaks  of  "  our  continuance  in  THIS  SIN,"  refer 
ring  to  the  people  at  large.  It  also  speaks  of  working  out 
"the  deliverance  of  our  country  from  the  evil  and  GUILT 
of  slavery."  It  is  true  that  the  paper  of  1818  says  the 
severest  things  of  the  system  that  any  one  could  de 
sire  ;  things  which,  from  the  language  used,  would 
seem  to  imply  "evil,"  "guilt,"  and  "sin."  We  do  not 
see  how  that  language  can  mean  any  thing  else,  and  it  was 
probably  not  intended  to  convey  any  other  meaning  by 
those  who  used  it.  But  the  paper  of  1864  is  the  first  in 
stance  of  action  by  the  General  Assembly  which  has  come 
squarely  up  to  the  mark  and  pronounced  slavery,  in  terms, 
to  be  a  "  sin."  This  is,  unquestionably,  an  advanced  posi 
tion.  Words  are  things.  And  those  who  know  the  his 
tory  of  discussion  on  this  subject,  especially  in  the  Church, 
know  that  this  is  a  point  where  contending  parties  have 
erected  their  breastworks  and  "  made  a  stand."  The  mass, 


FEATURES  OF  THIS  REPORT.  415 

indeed,  of  those  who  have  opposed  slavery  at  the  North. 
within  the  Churches, — and  universally  those  who  have 
claimed  a  monopoly  of  "  conservative"  sentiment  and 
feeling,-^-have  persistently  maintained,  that  whatever  else 
was  true  of  slavery  as  an  "  evil,"  it  was  improper  to  call 
it  a  "  sin."  That  is  the  term  which  has  met  with  especial 
reprobation.  Some  would  tolerate  almost  any  other  hard 
word  of  the  English  language  but  that.  To  mystify  the  un 
initiated,  and  to  instruct  the  learned  more  clearly,  the  Latin 
has  been  brought  in  to  help  our  jejune  tongue  ;  and  so,  as 
we  have  all  often  heard,  "  Slavery  is  not  a  sin  per  se  /"  and 
"is  not  a  malum  in  se"  But  the  paper  of  1864,  using  a 
Saxon  term  which  is  often  upon  the  lips  of  men,  calls  it 
"this  SIN." 

As  we  are  speaking  of  things  simply  from  an  historical 
stand-point,  we  are  not  called  upon  here  either  to  condemn 
or  to  approve  of  this  report,  in  its  doctrines  or  terms,  so  far 
as  to  give  our  personal  views  of  slavery.  We  shall  do 
that  in  another  chapter.  We  simply  now  note  this  as  an 
advanced  position,  which  no  General  Assembly  has  ever 
before  taken.  We  presume  the  Assembly  understood 
what  they  were  about,  and  we  presume  they  meant  just 
what  they  said.  It  is  in  that  light  significant  of  the  times 
in  which  we  live,  when  men  can  speak  what  they  believe 
to  be  the  truth,  without  the  main  effort  being  to  seek  to 
conciliate  somebody  who  might  otherwise  be  mortally 
offended. 

What  the  bearing  of  this  feature  of  the  report  may  be 
in  the  minds  of  the  members  of  the  Assembly,  we  of 
course  do  not  know,  any  farther  than  may  be  gathered 
from  the  discussions,  and  not  much  light  is  there  emitted 
upon  the  simple  point  in  hand.  Men  differ  about  what 
slavery  is,  disagree  in  their  definition  of  the  system  and  of 
its  nature,  and  probably  members  of  the  Assembly  differ 


416  THE    CHlinCH    AXD    SLAVERY. 

about  the  judgment  pronounced  upon  this  point,  calling 
slavery  a  "  sin."  Some  may  understand  merely  the  system 
of  slave  laws  existing  at  the  South  ;  some  may  understand 
the  practice  of  slaveholding  under  those  laws,  without 
which  slavery  is  the  merest  abstraction ;  some  may  include 
both  ;  and,  according  as  each  may  understand  the  case,  he 
may  have  voted  in  the  Assembly,  and  may  insist  that  his 
view  is  that  which  the  body  meant.  This  difference  in 
men's  reasons  for  a  vote,  and  of  the  subject  voted  on,  and 
ns  to  what  is  the  result  of  the  decision,  is  not  confined  to 
slavery.  It  enters  into  all  complex  matters  upon  which 
men  deliberate  and  act. 

Nor  do  we  know,  beyond  the  possibility  of  mistake, 
what  the  committee  or  its  distinguished  chairman  meant 
by  this  language  ;  not  because  there  is  any  obscurity  in 
the  terms  employed,  but  because,  in  order  to  understand 
the  exact  meaning  and  intent  of  those  who  use  them,  we 
must  know  more  fully  the  views  of  the  system  which, 
personally,  they  entertain.  If  we  may  judge,  however, 
from  the  terms  themselves,  the  meaning  is  clear  and  un 
mistakable.  The  language  of  the  committee  is  certainly 
clear.  When  they  speak  of  "  the  present  judgments"  of 
God  as  having  been  "  inflicted"  (though  not  "  solely")  "in 
punishment  for  our  continuance  in  this  sin"  we  cannot 
suppose  for  a  moment  they  refer  merely  to  the  system  of 
slave-laws  at  the  South.  There  can  be  no  actual  sin  with 
out  a  sinner;  nor  can  "punishment"  be  "inflicted"  for 
"  this  sin"'  or  any  other,  except  upon  the  sinner.  Even 
Christ  was,  legally,  a  sinner.  Much  less  can  a  person  or  a 
people  be  punished  for  a  "  continuance?'*  in  sin,  unless  they 
are  personally  in  the  practice  of  sin.  But  what  practice 
can  be  meant  in  this  case  ?  The  upholding  of  slave-laws  ? 
This  would  be  perfectly  ridiculous,  unless  there  were  some 
person  held  in  slavery  under  them,  and  some  other  person 


FEATURES  OF  THIS  EEPOBT.  417 

holding  him  there.  This  is  the  practice  which  we  suppose 
the  committee  meant,  or  their  chairman  who  drew  the  re 
port  ;  and  the  "  continuance"  of  this  practice,  we  suppose, 
is  -the  "sin"  meant,  for  whose  "punishment"  God's 
"  present  judgments"  are  being  "  inflicted." 

There  may  be  those  at  the  South  who  are  not  person 
ally  in  the  practice  of  slavery,  who  yet  connive  at  or 
approve  of  the  slave-laws,  and  of  the  practice  under  them 
in  which  others  are  involved ;  and,  so  far  forth,  they  are 
concerned  in  "  this  sin."  There  are  also  those  at  the 
North  in  the  same  category ;  not  practising  slavery,  but 
conniving  at  the  slave-laws  and  the  practice  of  others 
under  them.  And  as  the  report  regards  "  the  present 
judgments"  as  having  come  upon  the  whole  people,  as  too 
manifestly  is  the  case,  the  whole  people  are  suffering  this 
"  punishment."  The  slavery  of  the  South  is  in  a  sense  a 
national  thing,  and  involves,  through  its  political  and 
moral  bearings,  national  responsibilities.  For  "  our  con 
tinuance  in  this  sin,"  as  a  nation,  we  are  as  a  nation  pun 
ished.  But  what,  as  a  nation,  do  we  continue  to  approve, 
connive  at,  tolerate,  or  uphold,  and  for  which  we  are  pun 
ished  ?  Can  it  be  merely  a  system  of  laws,  a  bundle  of 
rigorous  legalities;  or,  is  it  not  these  laws  and  the  practice 
of  the  people  who  hold  slaves  under  them  f 

We  of  course  readily  admit  the  wide  difference  between 
slave-laws  and  slaveholding.  We  can  imagine  a  set  of 
legislators  concocting  a  system  of  laws,  without  there 
being  a  slave  or  a  slaveholder ;  a  system  under  which  they 
intend  to  introduce,  at  a  future  time,  their  chattels,  when 
they  can  kidnap  them.  But  in  the  system  itself,  without 
victims,  however  rigorous  the  laws,  there  would  be  no 
sin,  although  the  legislators,  from  the  mere  intention  of 
putting  slavery  in  practice,  might  be  at  the  time  great  sin 
ners.  We  can  understand,  too,  that  in  fact,  there  is,  and 


418  THE    CHURCH    AND    SLAVERY. 

alw.iys  may  have  been,  a  great  difference  at  the  South 
among-  slaveholders ;  some  approving  the  whole  system, 
laws,  practice,  and  all,  and  not  wishing  a  change  ;  others 
di>a|>j>roving  of  certain  features  in  slave-laws,  and  either 
acquiescing  or  striving  to  have  them  altered,  but  continuing 
the  practice  of  slavery  from  choice;  others  condemning 
the  laws  and  the  practice  but,  seeing  their  way  more  or 
less  hedged  up  toward  emancipation,  continuing  still  in  the 
practice ;  though  we  think  the  number  in  this  latter  classi 
fication  has  for  a  long  time  been  very  small  and  growing 
beautifully  less.  These  distinctions  are  palpable  and  real ; 
and  in  judging  of  individuals,  they  cannot  be  properly 
left  out  of  the  account.  So,  also,  we  can  imagine  such  a 
change  to  occur  in  the  system  at  the  South,  as  a  possible 
thing,  as  would  divest  the  laws  of  their  odious  features, 
and  leave  little  or  nothing  else  but  the  relation  of  master 
and  slave,  and  the  practice  of  slavery;  though,  unhappily, 
with  all  the  ameliorating  influences  of  Christianity  (and 
we  have  the  word  of  Dr.  Stiles  for  it,  that  they  are  a  people 
of  purer  and  simpler  Christianity  than  any  other),  the  sys 
tem  of  slave-laws  has  continued  from  generation  to  gen 
eration  much  the  same. 

But  when  we  would  speak  of  and  characterize  slavery 
as  an  INSTITUTION,  as  a  thing  standing  out  before  all  men, 
we  must  take  it  as  a  whole  and  take  it  Just  as  it  is.  Nor 
is  it  material,  practically,  how  it  may  be  verbally  defined ; 
a  point  on  which  logomachy  has  run  wild,  and  in  which 
no  two  men  have  ever  agreed.  What  the  system,  as  such,, 
is,  can  admit  of  no  doubt.  To  speak  of  it  properly,  as  an 
institution,  all  its  elements  must  be  embraced ;  the  laws 
just  as  they  are,  and  the  practice  just  as  it  is,  embracing 
the  persons  held  and  the  persons  holding  them.  And 
when  the  committee  reported,  and  the  Assembly  enacted, 
that  we  were  punished  "  for  our  continuance  in  this 


FEATURES  OF  THIS  REPORT.  419 

we  understand  them  to  cover  by  these  terms  all  that  makes 
the  institution  what  it  is.  If  so,  we  regard  it  in  this  sense, 
and  by  these  terms,  as  declaring  what  no  General  Assem 
bly  has  ever  before  declared.  In  no  sense  has  any  pre 
vious  Assembly  ever  declared  slavery  to  be  a  "  sin."* 
4.  It  is  the  judgment  of  the  Assembly  that  slavery  is 

*  Some  rather  curious  things  were  developed  in  the  discussion  upon  this  report 
in  the  Assembly.  Dr.  Eice  is  reported  as  saying :  "He  now  expected  to  vote  for 
the  paper.  The  war  had  not  taught  him  any  thing  at  all  about  slavery.  He  had 
been  accustomed  to  investigate  the  subject  for  a  long  time."  "He  never  had 
believed  that  slavery  was  of  itself  a  sin.  He  regarded  it  as  an  evil,  and  considered 
it  a  sin  to  undertake  to  perpetuate  slavery.1'1  " //<?  had,  since  the  war,  learned 
nothing  new.'1''  "  It  had  been  assumed  that  the  act  of  1845  was  inconsistent  with 
that  of  1818.  This  he  denied.  It  was  not  inconsistent  with  that  act.  He  proceeded 
to  explain  the  act  of  1S45,  and  showed 'that  it  was  less  proslavery  than  that  of 
1818.  Why  do  not  brethren  read  the  whole  document  before  they  talk  about  it  as  a 
proslavery  paper?" — Philadelphia  Presbyterian.  (1.)  Although  Dr.  Eice  may 
"  never"1  have  "believed  that  slavery  was  of  itself  a  sin"  yet  he  voted  for  Judge 
Matthetvs's  paper,  which  pronounces  it  "  Tins  SIN."  Although  the  war  may  not  have 
"taught  him  any  thing  at  all  about  slavery,"  as  his  speech  would  indicate,  yet  his 
vote  shows  that  he  took  with  others  an  advanced  position  in  a  deliverance  upon 
slavery.  Some  men  advance  without  knowledge,  and  some  without  knowing  it. 
Dr.  Eice  may  have  done  both.  (2.)  Dr.  Eice  declares  that  the  paper  of  1845  is  "  less 
proslavery  than  that  of  ISIS."  If  this  statement  should  ever  run  the  blockade  with 
other  contraband  goods,  we  should  be  curious  to  know  how  it  would  be  received  in 
Dixie.  What  will  "  our  Southern  brethren"  say,  when  they  hear  that  it  has  been 
affirmed  in  the  General  Assembly,  of  the  act  of  1845,  with  which  they  had  been 
'•'•perfectly  contented  for  sixteen  years," — and  by  the  author  of  that  act,  who,  they 
declare  "  has  been  distinguished  as  a  defender  of  slavery  and  the  South,  and  as  an 
antagonist  of  the  an tislavery  party," — that  the  said  act  of  1845  is  "  LESS  proslavery 
than  that  of  1818  !"  What  will  "  our  Southern  brethren"  say  ?  If  any  of  them  have 
become,  by  the  influence  of  the  rebellion,  addicted  to  what  was  currently  reported 
in  the  early  stage  of  it,  of  the  late  Major-General  Bishop  Polk,  they  may  possibly  do 
what  "  our  army  did  in  Flanders  !"  (3.)  "  He  had,  since  the  war,  learned  nothing 
new,"  says  Dr.  Eice.  Most  men  in  this  nation  have  no  doubt  learned  a  great  many 
things  "  since  the  war"  began.  We  hear  this  on  every  band,  from  the  President  of 
the  United  States  down.  It  is  our  humble  opinion  that  the  whole  nation  has  learned 
much  ;  has  been  led  along  in  paths  that  they  knew  not  of,  in  God's  wonderful  provi 
dence;  and  that  the  people  will  learn  much  more  before  "the  war"  is  over.  _But 
Dr.  Eice  is  perhaps  the  one  exception,  essential  to  prove  the  rule.  If  he  has 
"learned  nothing  new"  thus  far,  he  probably  will  not  hereafter.  Some  men  are 
never  willing  to  admit  that  they  h:ive  any  thing  to  learn,  that  they  can  be  taught  by 
anybody,  or  by  any  course  of  events.  Is  he  one  of  them  ?  Perhaps  he  is  self- 
deceived  on  matters  concerning  "  the  war,"  as  upon  slavery,  and  takes  a  position 
here,  too,  in  advance  of  the  one  he  formerly  was  understood  to  hold,  without  being 
aware  of  it. 

19 


420  THE    CHURCH   AND    SLAVERY. 

"  the  root  of  bitterness  from  which  has  sprung  rebellion, 
war,  and  bloodshed,  and  the  long  list  of  horrors  that  fol 
low  in  their  train;"  that  hence,  as  it  threatens  our 
national  existence,  its  continuance  is  "  incompatible  with 
the  preservation  of  our  liberty  and  independence ;"  and 
hence  it  urges  all  to  efforts  to  remove  it,  regarding  "the 
interests  of  peace  and  of  social  order  identified  with  the 
success  of  emancipation." 

5.  It  virtually  approves  of  and  indorses  the  measures 
of  the  Government,  and  the  movements  in  certain  Border 
States,  looking  to  the  entire  removal  of  slavery  from  the 
land,  in  the  exercise  of  both  military  and  civil  authority, 
and  of  the  restoration  of  our  national  Union  on  the  basis 
of  universal  freedom ;  regarding  these  things  as  calling  for 
"gratitude  to  Almighty  God." 

TE    DEUM   LAtTDAMTJS. 

We  truly  rejoice  in  this  deliverance.  We  doubt  not  that 
Dr.  Hodge  in  the  Repertory  is  substantially  correct  in  say 
ing  :  "  There  cannot  be  a  doubt  that  the  sentiments  of  this 
paper  are  the  sentiments  of  the  Presbyterian  Church  in 
these  United  States."  He  of  course  means  in  the  loyal 
States ;  and  in  this  sense  we  say  he  is  substantially  cor 
rect  :  we  wish  we  could  say  he  is  entirely  so.  But  there 
are  some  Presbyterians  in  some  of  the  Border  States  whose 
souls  are  filled  with  mourning  and  lamentation  at  this  act 
of  the  Assembly;  and  there  is  one  "religious"  journal 
Claiming  to  be  the  organ  of  the  only  true  Presbyterians  left 
in  the  whole  land,  whose  wrath  has  taken  new  fire  from 
the  fuel  here  furnished. 

We  can,  without  qualification,  adopt  another  statement 
of  the  Repertory,  which  says :  "  We  think  it  may  safely 
be  assumed,  that  the  report  unanimously  adopted  by  the 
Assembly,  expresses  the  opinions  and  feelings  of  the  vast 


TE    DEUM    LAUDAMUS.  421 

majority  of  the  people  in  the  Northern,  Western,  and 
Middle  States.  In  this  view  of  the  matter,  we  regard  the 
adoption  of  such  a  paper  a  matter  of  great  public  impor 
tance.  It  is  the  revelation  of  a  spirit  of  loyalty,  and  of 
devotion  to  the  great  cause  for  which  the  nation  is  now 
contending  as  for  its  life.  In  this  view,  it  is  matter  for 
gratitude  and  encouragement." 

It  is  of  rather  small  consequence  what  that  small  frag 
ment  of  the  Church  may  think  who  groan  over  this  deliver 
ance.  The  mass  of  the  loyal  people,  we  verily  believe,  are 
convinced,  after  what  slavery  has  attempted  in  this  rebel 
lion,  that  its  death  is  just  and  its  doom  is  near.  We  are, 
therefore,  especially  rejoiced,  that  the  General  Assembly 
of  the  Presbyterian  Church,  by  an  almost  unanimous  vote, 
has  so  explicitly  put  itself  upon  the  record ;  has  declared 
for  universal  emancipation,  as  essential  to  "  peace,"  "  social 
order,"  "  liberty  and  independence ;"  and  has  pledged  itself 
and  the  people  to  sustain  the  Government  in  its  measures 
for  the  restoration  of  our  National  Unity. 

TO    GOD    BE    THE    PKAISE  ! 


422  KENTUCKY    OPINIONS. 


CHAPTER  XL 

KENTUCKY  OPINIONS.— THE  PAST  AND   THE  PEESENT. 

As  no  Border  State  has  at  any  time  exhibited,  among 
the  religious  portion  of  its  community,  more  decided  con 
victions  upon  Slavery,  pro  and  con,  than  Kentucky,  we 
propose  in  this  chapter  to  present  some  of  the  views  ex 
pressed  against  the  system,  at  different  periods,  by  some 
of  her  eminent  men  and  religious  bodies. 

That  which  claims  the  pre-eminence,  on  account  of  the 
sentiments  announced,  the  source  whence  they  emanate, 
and  the  time  of  their  utterance,  is  an  Address  issued  in 
the  year  1835.  It  ^  from  a  Committee  of  the  Synod  of 
the  Presbyterian  Church  in  Kentucky,  to  the  members  of 
this  Church  throughout  the  State. 

The  authority  under  which  it  was  issued  is  as  follows, 
as  found  in  the  minutes  of  the  Synod  :  "  For  the  purpose 
of  promoting  harmony  and  concert  of  action  on  this  im 
portant  subject,  the  Synod  do  Resolve,  That  a  Committee 
of  ten  be  appointed,  to  consist  of  an  equal  number  of 
ministers  and  elders,  whose  business  it  shall  be  to  digest 
and  prepare  a  plan  for  the  moral  and  religious  instruction 
of  our  slaves,  and  for  their  future  emancipation,  and  to 
report  such  plan  to  the  several  Presbyteries  within  our 
bounds  for  their  consideration  and  approval." 

It  is  entitled :  "  An  Address  to  the  Presbyterians  of 
Kentucky,  proposing  a  Plan  for  the  Instruction  and 
Emancipation  of  their  Slaves,  by  a  Committee  of  the 
Synod  of  Kentucky." 

The  Committee  were :    "  Messrs.  John   Brown,    John 


ADDRESS  OF  THE  SYNOD.  423 

Green,  Thomas  P.  Smith,  J.  R.  Alexander,  and  Charles 
Cunningham,  laymen;  arid  Revs.  Wm.  L.  Breckinridge, 
James  K.  Burch,  Robert  Stuart,  Nathan  H.  Hall,  and 
John  C.  Young,  ministers." 

Some  of  these  persons  yet  survive.  Dr.  Young,  whose 
name  appears  last  on  the  list,  was  at  that  time  President 
of  Centre  College,  the  post  which  Dr.  William  L.  Breck 
inridge,  the  first  on  the  list  of  ministers,  now  fills.  This 
eloquent  and  pungent  address  was  from  the  pen  of  Dr. 
Young,  than  whom  no  man  ever  stood  higher  in  the  esteem 
of  the  Presbyterian  Church  in  Kentucky.  Though  long, 
we  bespeak  for  it  a  careful  perusal.  If  there  is  to  be  found 
in  the  English  language  a  more  decided  condemnation  of 
slavery  as  a  system,  we  have  not  met  with  it.  We  have 
only  to  suggest  to  the  reader  that  he  constantly  bear  in 
mind  that  he  is  not  reading  a  paper  which  emanated  from 
Boston,  and  was  designed  for  the  latitude  of  New  Eng 
land,  but  rather  an  address  written  in  Kentucky,  and,  under 
the  authority  of  the  Synod,  made  to  the  Presbyterians  of 
the  State.  The  chief  portions  of  this  Address  are  as 
follows : 

DEAR  BRETHREN — The  will  of  Synod  has  made  it  our  duty  to  lay 
before  you  "a  plan  for  the  moral  and  religious  instruction,"  as  well  as 
for  "the  future  emancipation,"  of  the  slaves  under  your  care.  We  feel 
the  responsibility  and  difficulty  of  the  duty  to  which  the  Church  has 
called  us,  yet  the  character  of  those  whom  we  address  strongly 
encourages  us  to  hope  that  our  labor  will  not  be  in  vain.  You  profess 
to  be  governed  by  the  principles  and  precepts  of  a  holy  religion ;  you 
recognize  the  fact  that  you  have  yourselves  "  been  made  free"  by  the 
blood  of  the  Son  of  God,  and  you  believe  that  you  have  been  imbued 
with  a  portion  of  the  same  spirit  which  was  in  "  Him  who,  though  He 
was  rich,  yet  for  our  sakes  became  poor."  When  we  point  out  to  such 
persons  their  duty,  and  call  upon  them  to  fulfil  it,  our  appeal  cannot 
be  altogether  fruitless.  But  we  have  a  still  stronger  ground  of  en 
couragement  in  our  firm  conviction  that  the  cause  which  we  advocate 
is  the  cause  of  God,  and  that  His  assistance  will  make  it  finally  prevail. 


424  KENTUCKY    OPINIONS. 

May  He  who  "  hears  the  cry  of  the  poor  and  needy,"  and  who  has 
commanded  to  let  the  "oppressed  go  free,"  give  to  each  one  of  us  wis 
dom  to  know  our  duty  and  strength  to  fulfil  it. 

We  earnestly  entreat  you,  brethren,  to  receive  our  communication  in 
the  same  spirit  of  kindness  in  which  it  is  made,  and  permit  neither  pre 
judice  nor  interest  to  close  your  minds  against  the  reception  of  truth,  or 
steel  your  hearts  against  the  convictions  of  conscience.  Very  soon  it 
will  be  a  matter  of  no  moment  whether  we  have  had  large  or  small 
possessions  on  the  earth;  but  it  will  be  of  infinite  importance 
whether  or  not  we  have  conscientiously  sought  out  the  will  of 
God  and  done  it. 

We  all  admit  that  the  system  of  slavery  which  exists  among  us  is 
not  right.  Why  then  do  we  assist  in  perpetuating  it?  Why  do  we 
make  no  serious  efforts  to  terminate  it  ?  Is  it  not  because  our  per 
ception  of  its  siufulness  is  very  feeble  and  indistinct,  while  our  percep 
tion  of  the  difficulties  of  instructing  and  emancipating  our  slaves  is 
strong  and  clear  ?  As  long  as  we  believe  that  slavery,  as  it  exists 
among  us,  is  a  light  evil  in  the  sight  of  God,  so  long  will  we  feel  inclined 
to  pronounce  every  plan  that  can  be  devised  for  its  termination  inexpedient 
or  impracticable.  Before  then  we  unfold  our  plan,  we  wish  to  examine 
the  system  and  try  it  by  the  principles  which  religion  teaches.  If  it  shall 
not  be  thus  proved  to  be  an  abomination  in  the  sight  of  a  just  and  holy 
God,  we  shall  not  solicit  your  concurrence  in  any  plan  for  its  abolition. 
But  if,  when  fairly  examined,  it  shall  be  seen  to  be  a  thing  which  God 
abhors,  we  may  surely  expect  that  no  trifling  amount  of  trouble  or  loss 
will  deter  you  from  lending  your  efforts  to  its  extermination. 

Slavery  is  not  the  same  all  the  world  over.  And  to  ascertain  its 
character  to  any  particular  State  or  country,  we  must  examine  the  consti 
tuents  and  effects  of  the  kind  of  slavery  which  there  exists.  The  system,  as 
it  exists  among  us  and  is  constituted  by  our  laws,  consists  of  three  dis 
tinct  parts  :  a  deprivation  of  the  right  of  property,  a  deprivation  of  personal 
liberty,  and  a  deprivation  of  personal  security.  In  all  its  parts  it  is  mani 
festly  a  violation  of  the  laws  of  God,  as  revealed  by  the  light  of  nature 
as  well  as  by  the  light  of  revelation. 

1.  A  part  of  our  system  of  slavery  consists  in  depriving  human  beings 
of  the  right  to  acquire  and  hold  property.  Does  it  need  any  proof  to  show 
that  God  has  given  to  all  human  beings  a  right  to  the  proceeds  of  their 
own  labor  ?  The  heathen  acknowledge  it ;  every  man  feels  it.  The  Bible 
is  full  of  denunciations  against  those  who  withhold  from  others  the  fruits 
of  their  exertions.  "  Woe  unto  him  that  buildeth  his  house  by  unrigh- 


ADDRESS  OF  THE  SYNOD.  425 

teousness,  and  his  chambers  by  wrong;  that  useth  his  neighbor's  service 
without  wages,  and  giveth  him-not  for  his  work."  Jer.  xxii.  13.  See  also 
James  v.  4;  Lev.  xix.  13  ;  Deut.  xxiv.  14,  15.  Does  an  act  which  is  wrong 
when  done  once  and  towards  one  individual,  become  right  because  it  is 
practised  daily  and  hourly  and  towards  thousands  ?  Does  the  Just  and 
holy  One  frown  the  less  upon  injustice  because  it  is  systematically  prac 
tised,  and  is  sanctioned  by  the  laws  of  the  land  ?  If  the  chicanery  of  law 
should  enable  us  to  escape  the  payment  of  our  debts,  or  if  a  human 
legislature  should  discharge  us  from  our  obligations  to  our  creditors, 
could  we,  without  deep  guilt,  withhold  from  our  neighbors  that  which, 
is  their  due  ?  Xo ;  we  all  recognize  the  principle  that  the  laws  of  the 
God  of  nature  can  never  be  repealed  by  any  legislature  under  heaven. 
These  laws  will  endure  when  the  statutes  of  earth  shall  have 
crumbled  with  the  parchments  on  which  they  are  enrolled;  and  by  these 
laws  we  know  that  we  must  be  judged  in  the  day  in  which  the  desti 
nies  of  our  souls  shall  bo  determined. 

2.  T}ie  deprivation  of  personal  liberty  forms  another  part  of  our  system 
of  slavery.  Not  only  has  the  slave  no  right  to  his  wife  and  children, 
he  has  no  right  even  to  himself.  His  very  body,  his  muscles,  his  bones, 
his  flesh,  are  all  the  property  of  another.  The  movements  of  his  limbs 
are  regulated  by  the  will  of  a  master.  He  may  be  sold  like  a  beast 
of  the  field ;  he  may  be  transported  in  chains  like  a  felon.  "Was  the 
blood  of  our  Revolution  shed  to  establish  a  false  principle,  when  it  was 
poured  out  in  defence  of  the  assertion  that  "all  men  are  created  equal;" 
that  "  they  are  endowed  by  their  Creator  with  certain  inalienable 
rights ;  that  among  these  are  life,  liberty,  and  the  pursuit  of  happi 
ness  ?"  If  it  be  a  violation  of  the  rights  of  nature  to  deprive  men  of 
their  political  freedom,  the  injustice  is  surely  much  more  flagrant  when 
we  rob  them  of  personal  liberty.  The  condition  of  a  subject  is  enviable 
compared  with  the  condition  of  a  slave.  "We  are  shocked  at  the  despotism 
exercised  over  the  Poles.  But  theirs  is  a  political  yoke,  and  is  light  com 
pared  with  the  heavy  personal  yoke  that  bows  down  the  two  millions 
of  our  colored  countrymen.  Does  European  injustice  lose  its  foul  char 
acter  when  practised  with  aggravations  in  America? 

Still  further,  the  deprivation  of  personal  liberty  is  so  complete,  that  it 
destroys  the  rights  of  conscience.  Our  system,  as  established  by  law, 
arms  the  master  with  power  to  prevent  his  slave  even  from  worshipping 
God  according  to  the  dictates  of  his  own  conscience.  The  owner  of  hu 
man  beings  among  us  may  legally  restrain  them  from  assembling  to  hear 
the  i  instructions  of  divine  truth,  or  even  from  ever  uniting  their  hearts 


426  KENTUCKY    OPINIONS. 

and  voices  in  social  prayer  and  praise  to  Him  who  created  them.  God 
alone  is  Lord  over  the  conscience.  Yet  our  system,  defrauding  alike 
our  Creator  and  our  slaves,  confers  upon  men  this  prerogative  of  Deity. 
Argument  is  unnecesary  to  show  the  guilt  and  madness  of  such  a  sys 
tem.  And  do  we  not  participate  in  its  criminality  if  we  iiphold  it  ? 

3.  The  deprivation  of  personal  security  is  the  remaining  constituent  of 
our  system  of  slavery.  The  time  was,  in  our  own  as  well  as  in  other 
countries,  when  even  the  life  of  the  slave  was  absolutely  in  the  hands  of 
the  master.  It  is  not  so  now  among  us.  The  life  of  a  bondman  cannot 
be  taken  with  impunity.  But  the  law  extends  its  protection  no  further. 
Cruelty  may  be  carried  to  any  extent,  provided  life  be  spared.  Man 
gling,  imprisonment,  starvation,  every  species  of  torture  may  be  inflicted 
upon  him,  and  he  has  no  redress.  But  not  content  with  thus  laying  the 
body  of  the  slave  defenceless  at  the  foot  of  the  master,  our  system  pro 
ceeds  still  further,  arid  strips  him  in  a  great  measure  of  all  protection 
against  the  inhumanity  of  any  other  white  man  who  may  choose  to 
maltreat  him.  The  laws  prohibit  the  evidence  of  a  slave  against  a 
white  man  from  being  received  in  a  court  of  justice.  So  that  wan 
tonness  and  cruelty  may  be  exercised  by  any  man  with  impunity  upon 
these  unfortunate  people,  provided  none  witness  it  but  those  of  their 
own  color.  In  describing  such  a  condition,  we  may  well  adopt  the 
language  of  sacred  writ:  "Judgment  is  turned  away  backward,  and 
justice  standeth  afar  off;  for  truth  is  fallen  in  the  street,  and  equity 
cannot  enter.  And  the  Lord  saw  it,  and  it  displeased  Him  that  there 
was  no  judgment." 

SUCH  IS  THE  ESSENTIAL   CHARACTER    OF  OUR   SLAVERY.      Without   any 

crime  on  the  part  of  its  unfortunate  subjects,  they  are  deprived  for  life, 
and  their  posterity  after  them,  of  the  right  to  property,  of  the  right  to 
liberty,  and  of  the  right  to  personal  security.  These  odious  features 
are  not  the  excrescences  upon  the  system,  they  are  the  system  itself; 
they  are  its  essential  constituent  parts.  And  can  any  man  believe  that 
such  a  thing  as  this  is  not  sinful ;  that  it  is  not  hated  by  God,  and 
ought  not  to  be  abhorred  and  abolished  by  man? 

But  there  are  certain  EFFECTS,  springing  naturally  and  necessarily  out 
of  such  a  system,  which  must  also  be  considered  in  forming  a  proper 
estimate  of  its  character. 

1.  Its  most  striking  effect  is  to  deprave  and  degrade  Us  subjects,  by  re 
moving  from  them  the  strongest  natural  checJcs  to  human  corruption.  As 
there  are  certain  laws  impressed  upon  the  elements,  by  which  God 
works  to  preserve  the  beauty  and  order  of  the  material  creation,  so  there 


ADDRESS  OF  THE  SYNOD.  427 

are  certain  principles  of  human  nature  by  which  he  works  to  save  the 
moral  world  from  ruin.  These  principles  operate  on  every  man  in  his 
natural  condition  of  freedom — restraining  his  vicious  propensities  and 
regulating  his  deportment.  The  fires  of  innate  depravity,  which,  if 
permitted  to  burst  forth,  would  destroy  the  individual  and  desolate 
society,  are  thus  measurably  repressed,  and  the  decencies  and  enjoy 
ments  of  life  are  preserved.  The  wisdom  and  goodness  of  God  are  thus 
seen  in  implanting  in  man  a  sense  of  character,  a  desire  for  property,  a 
love  for  distinction,  a  thirst  for  power,  and  a  zeal  for  family  advance 
ment.  All  these  feelings  working  in  the  minds  of  individuals,  though 
not  unmixed  with  evil,  combine  to  promote  their  own  happiness  and 
the  welfare  of  communities;  and  they  are  inferior,  in  the  good  which 
they  produce,  only  to  those  high  religious  principles  which  constitute 
the  image  of  God  in  the  soul  of  man.  The  presence  of  these  principles 
only  can  compensate  for  the  absence  of  those  natural  feelings.  When 
ever,  then,  these  natural  feelings  are  crushed  or  eradicated  in  any  human 
being,  he-  is  stripped  of  the  nobler  attributes  of  humanity,  and  is  de 
graded  into  a  creature  of  mere  appetite  and  passion.  His  sensuality  is 
the  only  cord  by  which  you  can  draw  him.  His  hopes  and  fears  all 
concentrate  upon  the  objects  of  his  appetites.  He  sinks  far  down  towards 
a  level  with  the  beast  of  the  field,  and  can  be  moved  to  action  only  by 
such  appeals  as  influence  the  lunatic  and  the  brute.  This  is  the  con 
dition  to  whick  slavery  reduces  the  great  mass  of  those  who  wear  its 
brutalizing  yoke.  Its  effects  upon  their  souls  are  far  worse  than  its 
effects  upon  their  bodies.  Character,  property,  distinction,  power,  and 
family  respectability,  are  all  withdrawn  from  the  reach  of  the  slave. 
No  object  is  presented  to  excite  and  cultivate  those  higher  feelings 
whose  exercise  would  repress  his  passions  and  regulate  his  appetites. 
Thus  slavery  deranges  and  ruins  the  moral  machinery  of  man;  it  cuts 
the  sinews  of  the  soul ;  it  extracts  from  human  nature  the  salt  that 
purifies  and  preserves  it,  and  leaves  it  a  corrupting  mass  of  appetite  and 
passion. 

2.  It  dooms  thousands  of  human  beings  to  liopekss  ignorance.  The  acqui 
sition  of  knowledge  requires  exertion ;  and  the  man  who  is  to  continue 
through  life  in  bondage  has  no  strong  motive  of  interest  to  induce  such 
exertion ;  for  knowledge  is  not  valuable  to  him,  as  to  one  who  eats  the 
fruits  of  his  own  labors.  The  acquisition  of  knowledge  requires  also 
facilities  of  books,  teachers,  and  time,  which  can  be  only  adequately 
furnished  by  masters :  and  those  who  desire  to  perpetuate  slavery  will 
never  furnish  thesu  facilities.  If  slaves  are  educated,  it  must  involve 
19* 


428  KENTUCKY    OPINIONS. 

some  outlay  on  the  part  of  the  master.  And  what  reliance  for  such  a 
sacrifice  can  be  placed  on  the  generosity  and  virtue  of  one  who  looks  on 
them  as  his  property,  and  who  has  been  trained  to  consider  every 
dollar  expended  on  them  as  lost,  unless  it  contributes  to  increase  their 
capacity  for  yielding  him  valuable  service  ?  He  will  have  them  taught 
to  work,  and  will  ordinarily  feed  and  clothe  them,  so  as  to  enable  them 
to  perform  their  work  to  advantage.  But  more  than  this  it  is  inconsist 
ent  with  our  knowledge  of  human  nature  to  expect  that  he  will  do  for 
them.  The  present  state  of  instruction  among  this  race  answers  exactly 
to  what  we  might  thus  naturally  anticipate.  Throughout  our  whole 
land,  so  far  as  we  can  learn,  there  is  but  one  school  in  which,  during 
the  week,  slaves  can  be  taught.  The  light  of  three  or  four  Sabbath- 
schools  is  seen  glimmering  through  the  darkness  that  covers  the  black 
population  of  a  whole  State.  Here  and  there  a  family  is  found  where 
humanity  and  religion  impel  the  master,  mistress,  or  children,  to  the 
laborious  task  of  private  instruction.  Great  honor  is  due  to  those  en 
gaged  in  this  philanthropic  and  self-denying  course,  and  their  reward 
shall  be  received  in  the  day  when  even  a  cup  of  cold  water,  given  from 
Christian  motives,  shall  secure  a  recompense.  But,  after  all,  what  is  the 
utmost  amount  of  instruction  given  to  slaves  ?  Those  who  enjoy  the 
most  of  it,  are  fed  with  but  the  crumbs  of  knowledge  which  fall  from 
their  master's  table — they  are  clothed  with  the  mere  shreds  and  tatters 
of  learning. 

Nor  is  it  to  be  expected  that  this  state  of  things  will  become  better, 
unless  it  is  determined  that  slavery  shall  cease.  The  impression  is  almost 
universal  that  intellectual  elevation  unfits  men  for  servitude,  and  renders 
it  impossible  to  retain  them  in  this  condition.  This  impression  is  un 
questionably  correct.  The  weakness  and  ignorance  of  their  victims  is 
the  only  safe  foundation  on  which  injustice  and  oppression  can  rest. 
And  the  effort  to  keep  in  bondage  men  to  whom  knowledge  has  im 
parted  power,  would  be  like  the  insane  attempt  of  the  Persian  tyrant  to 
chain  the  waves  of  the  sea,  and  whip  its  boisterous  waters  into  submis 
sion.  We  may  as  soon  expect  to  fetter  the  winds,  seal  up  the  clouds, 
or  extinguish  the  fires  of  the  volcano,  as  to  prevent  enlightened  minds 
from  recovering  their  natural  condition  of  freedom.  Hence,  in  some  of 
our  States  laws  have  been  enacted  prohibiting,  under  severe  penalties, 
the  instruction,  of  the  blacks ;  and  even  where  such  laws  do  not  exist, 
there  are  formidable  numbers  who  oppose  with  deep  hostility  every 
effort  to  enlighten  the  mind  of  the  negro.  These  men  are  determined 
that  slavery  shall  be  perpetuated,  and  they  know  that  their  univerBal 


ADDRESS  OP  THE  SYNOD.  429 

education  must  be  followed  by  their  universal  emancipation.  They  are 
then  acting  wisely,  according  to  the  wisdom  of  this  world,  when  they 
deny  education  to  slaves ;  they  are  adopting  a  measure  necessary  to 
secure  their  determined  purpose.  It  is,  however,  policy  akin  to  that 
which  once  induced  the  ruffian  violators  of  female  chastity  to  cut  out 
the  tongue  and  cut  off  the  hands  of  their  victim,  to  disable  her  from 
uttering  or  writing  their  names.  She  had  to  be  maimed,  or  they  would 
be  brought  to  justice.  It  is  such  policy  as  the  robber  exhibits,  who 
silences  in  death  the  voices  that  might  accuse  him,  and  buries  in  the 
grave  the  witnesses  of  his  crimes.  He  is  determined  to  pursue  his. 
occupation,  and  his  safety  in  it  requires  that  he  should  not  indulge  in 
the  weakness  of  keeping  a  conscience.  How  horrible  must  be  that  sys 
tem  which,  in  the  opinion  of  even  its  strongest  advocates,  demands,  as 
the  necessary  condition  of  its  existence,  that  knowledge  should  be  shut 
out  from  the  minds  of  those  who  live  under  it ;  that  they  should  be 
reduced  as  nearly  as  possible  to  the  level  of  brutes  or  living  machines ; 
that  the  powers  of  their  souls  should  be  crushed.  Let  each  one  of  us 
ask,  can  such  a  system  be  aided  or  even  tolerated  without  deep  crimi 
nality  ? 

3.  It  deprives  its  subjects  in  a  great  measure  of  the  privileges  of  the  Gospel. 
You  may  be  startled  at  this  statement,  and  feel  disposed  to  exclaim, 
"  Our  slaves  are  always  permitted  and  even  encouraged  to  attend  upon 
the  ordinances  of  worship."  But  a  candid  and  close  examination  will 
show  the  correctness  of  our  charge.  The  privileges  of  the  Gospel,  as 
enjoyed  by  the  white  population  in  this  land,  consist  in  free  access  to 
the  Scriptures,  a  regular  gospel  ministry,  and  domestic  means  of  grace. 
Neither  of  these  is,  to  any  extent  worth  naming,  enjoyed  by  slaves,  as 
a  moment's  consideration  will  satisfactorily  show.  The  law,  as  it  is  here, 
does  not  prevent/ree  access  to  the  Scriptures ;  but  ignorance,  the  natural 
result  of  their  condition,  does.  The  Bible  is  before  them,  but  it  is  to 
them  a  sealed  book.  "  The  light  shineth  in  the  darkness,  but  the  dark 
ness  comprehendeth  it  not."  Like  the  paralytic  who  lay  for  years  by 
the  pool  of  Bethesda,  the  waters  of  healing  are  near  them,  but  no  kind 
hand  enables  them  to  try  their  efficacy.  Very  few  enjoy  the  advantages 
of  a  regular  gospel  ministry.  They  are,  it  is  true,  permitted  generally, 
and  often  encouraged,  to  attend  upon  the  ministrations  specially  de 
signed  for  their  masters.  But  the  instructions  communicated  on  such 
occasions  are  above  the  level  of  their  capacities.  They  listen  as  to 
prophesy  ings  in  an  unknown  tongue.  The  preachers  of  their  own  color 
are  still  farther  from  ministering  to  their  spiritual  wants,  as  these  impart 


430  KENTUCKY    OPINIONS. 

to  them,  not  of  their  knowledge,  but  their  ignorance ;  they  heat  their 
animal  feelings,  but  do  not  kindle  a  flame  of  intelligent  devotion.  It 
has  been  proposed  by  some  zealous  and  devoted  friends  of  the  colored 
race,  to  supply  the  deficiency  of  gospel  ministrations  among  them  by 
the  employment  of  suitable  missionaries,  who  may  labor  exclusively 
among  them.  We  need  not  here  speculate  on  the  probable  results  of 
such  a  scheme,  if  carried  into  effect  in  a  community  where  there  is  no 
intention  to  emancipate  ;  for  before  there  is  found  among  us  benevolence 
enough  to  adopt  and  execute  it  on  a  scale  large  enough  to  effect  any 
kighly  valuable  purpose,  the  community  will  be  already  ripe  for  meas 
ures  of  emancipation.  Such  a  spirit  of  kindness  towards  this  unfortunate 
race  as  this  scheme  presupposes,  can  never  coexist  with  a  determination 
to  keep  them  in  hopeless  bondage.  Further,  there  are  no  houses  of 
worship  exclusively  devoted  to  the  colored  population.  The  galleries 
of  our  own  churches,  which  are  set  apart  to  their  use,  would  not  hold 
the  tenth  part  of  their  numbers  ;  and  even  these  few  seats  are  in  general 
thinly  occupied  So  that,  as  a  body,  it  is  evident  that  our  slaves  do  not 
enjoy  the  public  ordinances  of  religion.  Domestic  means  of  grace  are 
still  more  rare  among  them.  Here  and  there  a  family  is  found  whose 
servants  are  taught  to  bow  with  their  masters  around  the  fireside  altar. 
But  their  peculiarly  adverse  circumstances,  combined  with  the  natural 
alienation  of  their  hearts  from  God,  render  abortive  the  slight  efforts  of 
most  masters  to  induce  their  attendance  on  the  domestic  services  of 
religion.  And  if  we  visit  the  cottages  of  those  slaves  who  live  apart 
from  their  masters,  where  do  we  find  them  reading  their  Bibles  and 
kneeling  together  before  a  throne  of  mercy?  Family  ordinances  of 
religion  are  almost  unknown  among  the  blacks.  We  do  not  wish  to 
exaggerate  the  description  of  this  deplorable  religious  condition  of  our 
colored  population.  We  know  that  instances  of  true  piety  are  frequently 
found  among  them ;  but  these  instances  we  ah1  know  to  be  awfully  dis 
proportionate  to  their  numbers,  and  to  the  extent  of  those  means  of 
grace  which  exist  around  them.  When  the  missionaries  of  the  cross 
enter  a  heathen  land,  their  hope  of  fully  Christianizing  it  rests  upon  the 
fact  that  they  can  array  and  bring  to  bear  upon  the  minds  of  these 
children  of  ignorance  and  sin  all  those  varied  means  which  God  ha3 
appointed  for  the  reformation  of  man.  But  while  the  system  of  slavery 
continues  among  us,  these  means  can  never  be  efficiently  and  fully 
employed  for  the  conversion  of  the  degraded  sons  of  Africa.  Yet 
"  God  hath  made  them  of  one  blood"  with  ourselves ;  hath  provided 
for  them  the  same  redemption  •  hath  in  His  providence  cast  souls  upon 


ADDRESS    OP   THE    SYNOD.  431 

our  care,  and  hath  clearly  intimated  to  us  the  doom  of  him  who  "  seeth 
his  brother  have  need,  and  shutteth  up  his  bowels  of  compassion  from 
him."  If  by  our  example,  our  silence,  or  our  sloth,  we  perpetuate  a 
system  which  paralyzes  our  hands  when  we  attempt  to  convey  to  them 
the  bread  of  life,  and  which  inevitably  consigns  the  great  mass  of  them 
to  unending  perdition,  can  we  be  guiltless  in  the  sight  of  Him  who  hath 
made  us  stewards  of  His  grace  ? 

4.  This  system  licenses  and  produces  great  cruelty.  The  law  places  the 
whip  in  the  hands  of  the  master,  and  its  use,  provided  he  avoid  destroy 
ing  life,  is  limited  only  by  his  own  pleasure.  Considering  the  absolute 
power  with  which  our  people  are  armed,  it  must  be  acknowledged  that 
the  treatment  of  their  dependents  is,  in  general,  singularly  humane. 
Many  circumstances  operate  here  to  mitigate  the  rigors  of  perpetual 
servitude ;  and  it  is  probably  the  fact  that  no  body  of  slaves  have  been 
ever  better  fed,  better  clothed,  and  less  abused,  than  the  slaves  of  Ken 
tucky.  Still,  they  have  no  security  for  their  comfort  but  the  humanity 
and  generosity  of  men  who  have  been  trained  to  regard  them  not  as 
brethren,  but  as  property.  Humanity  and  generosity  are  at  best  poor 
guarantees  for  the  protection  of  those  who  cannot  assert  their  rights, 
and  over  whom  law  throws  no  protection.  Our  own  condition  we 
would  feel  to  be  wretched  indeed,  if  no  law  secured  us  from  the  insults 
and  maltreatment  even  of  our  equals.  But  superiority  naturally  begets 
contempt,  and  contempt  generates  maltreatment,  for  checking  which 
we  can  rely  not  on  virtue,  but  only  on  law.  There  are  in  our  land  hun 
dreds  of  thousands  clothed,  with  arbitrary  powers  over  those  whom 
they  are  educated  to  regard  as  their  property,  as  the  instruments  of 
their  will,  as  creatures  beneath  their  sympathy,  devoid  of  all  the  feel 
ings  which  dignify  humanity,  and  but  one  remove  above  cattle.  Is  it 
not  certain  that  many  of  these  hundreds  of  thousands  will  inflict  out 
rages  on  their  despised  dependents  ?  There  are  now  in  our  whole  land 
two  millions  of  human  beings  exposed,  defenceless,  to  every  insult  and 
every  injury,  short  of  maiming  or  death,  which  their  fellow-men  may 
choose  to  inflict.  They  suffer  all  that  can  be  inflicted  by  wanton  caprice, 
by  grasping  avarice,  by  brutal  lust,  by  malignant  spite,  and  by  insane 
anger.  Their  happiness  is  the  sport  of  every  whim  and  the  prey  of 
every  passion  that  may  occasionally  or  habitually  infest  the  master's 
bosom.  If  we  could  calculate  the  amount  of  woe  endured  by  ill-treated 
slaves,  it  would  overwhelm  every  compassionate  heart — it  would  move 
even  the  obdurate  to  sympathy.  There  is  also  a  vast  sum  of  suffering 
inflicted  upon  the  slave  by  humane  masters,  as  a  punishment  for  that 


432  KENTUCKY    OPINIONS. 

idleness  and  misconduct  which  slavery  naturally  produces.  The  ordi 
nary  motives  to  exertion  in  men  are  withdrawn  from  the  slave.  Some 
unnatural  stimulus  must  then  be  substituted,  and  the  whip  presents 
itself  as  the  readiest  and  most  efficient.  But  the  application  of  the 
whip  to  produce  industry,  is  like  the  application  of  the  galvanic  fluid  to 
produce  muscular  exertion.  The  effect  is  powerful  indeed,  out  momen 
tary  ;  and,  if  often  applied,  it  is  exhaustive  and  destructive  to  the  system. 
It  can  never  be  used  as  a  substitute  for  the  healthful  and  agreeable 
nervous  stimulus  with  which  nature  has  supplied  us.  Equally  vain  is 
the  attempt  to  supply  by  the  whip  the  deficiency" of  natural  motives  to 
exertion ;  it  produces  misery  and  degradation.  Yet,  inadequate  as  is 
this  substitute,  it  is  the  best  that  can  be  had ;  it  must  be  used  while 
the  system  lasts  :  the  condition  of  the  slave  is  unnatural,  and  his  treat 
ment  must  correspond  to  his  condition.  We  are  shocked  to  hear  of 
epicures  who  cause  the  animals  on  which  they  feast  to  be  whipped  to 
death,  that  their  flesh  may  be  more  delicate  and  delicious  to  the  taste. 
We  feel  it  to  be  disgusting  and  intolerable  cruelty  thus  to  inflict  pain 
even  upon  a  beast,  merely  to  satisfy  the  cravings  of  luxury ;  and  shall 
we  excuse  ourselves  if  a  desire  for  £ase  or  wealth  leads  us  to  sanction, 
sustain,  and  assist  in  perpetuating  a  system  which,  as  long  as  it  lasts, 
must  lacerate  the  bodies  and  grind  down  the  feelings  of  millions  of 
rational  and  immortal  beings  ? 

Brutal  stripes,  and  all  the  varied  kinds  of  personal  indignities,  are 
not  the  only  species  of  cruelty  which  slavery  licenses.  The  law  does 
not  recognize  the  family  relations  of  a  slave,  and  extends  to  him  no 
protection  in  the  enjoyment  of  domestic  endearments.  The  members 
of  a  slave  family  may  be  forcibly  separated,  so  that  they  shall  never 
more  meet  until  the  final  judgment.  And  cupidity  often  induces  the 
masters  to  practise  what  the  law.  allows.  Brothers  and  sisters,  parents 
and  children,  husbands  and  wives,  are  torn  asunder,  and  permitted  to 
see  each  other  no  more.  These  acts  are  daily  occurring  in  the  midst  of  us. 
The  shrieks  and  the  agony  often  witnessed  on  sacli  occasions  proclaim 
with  a  trumpet-tongue  the  iniquity  and  cruelty  of  our  system.  The 
cry  of  these  sufferers  goes  up  to  the  ears  of  the  Lord  of  Sabaoth. 
There  is  not  a  neighborhood  where  these  heart-rending  scenes  are  not  dis 
played.  There  is  not  a  village  or  road  that  does  not  behold  the  sad 
procession  of  manacled  outcasts,  whose  chains  and  mournful  counte 
nances  tell  that  they  are  exiled  by  force  from  all  that  their  hearts  held 
dear.  Our  Church,  years  ago,  raised  its  voice  of  solemn  warning 
against  this  flagrant  violation  of  every  principle  of  mercy,  justice,  tmd 


ADDRESS    OF    THE    SYNOD.  <1C3 

humanity.  Yet  we  blush  to  announce  to  you  and  to  the  world  that 
this  warning  has  been  often  -disregarded,  even  by  those  who  hold  to 
our  communion.  Cases  have  occurred  in  our  own  denomination  where 
professors  of  the  religion  of  mercy  have  torn  'the  mother  from  her  chil 
dren,  and  sent  her  into  a  merciless  and  returnless  exile.  Yet  acts  of 
discipline  have  rarely  followed  such  conduct.  Far  bo  it  from  us  to 
ascribe  to  our  people  generally  a  participation  in  these  deeds,  or  a 
sympathy  with  them;  they  abhor  and  loathe  them.  But  while  the 
system,  of  which  these  cruelties  are  the  legitimate  offspring,  is  tolerated 
among  us,  it  is  exceedingly  difficult  to  inflict  punishment  upon  their 
perpetrators.  If  we  commence  discipline  for  any  acts  which  the  laws 
of  slavery  sanction,  where  shall  we  stop?  What  principle  is  there 
which  will  justify  us  in  cutting  off  a  twig  or  branch  of  this  poison-tree 
that  will  not,  if  carried  fairly  out,  force  us  to  proceed  and  hew  down  its 
trunk  and  dig  up  its  roots  ?  These  cruelties  are  only  the  loathsome 
ulcers  which  show  corruption  in  the  blood  and  rottenness  in  the  bones 
of  this  system.  They  may  be  bound  up  and  mollified  with  ointment ; 
they  may  be  hidden  from  the  sight ;  but  they  cannot  be  entirely  re 
moved  until  there  is  a  thorough  renovation  within.  Our  Churches  can 
not  be  entirely  pure,  even  from  the  grosser  pollutions  o£  slavery,  until 
we  are  willing  to  pledge  ourselves  to  the  destruction  of  the  whole 
system. 

The  voice  of  the  civilized  world  has  been  lifted  up  in  execration  of 
the  despot  who  recently  dragged  numbers  of  the  unhappy  Poles  from 
their  country,  separating  husbands  and  wives,  parents  and  children. 
But  they  are  his  property  by  the  same  tenure  by  which  we  hold  our 
slaves ;  and  has  he  not  a  right,  he  may  exclaim,  to  do  as  he  pleases 
with  his  own?  Nay,  the  security  and  peace  of  his  dominions  require 
this  cruelty.  He  is  not  willing  to  relinquish  the  property  which  he  inher 
ited;  and  he  may  tell  us,  and  tell  us  truly,  that  it  cannot  be  retained  in 
safety  without  the  adoption  of  these  horrid  measures.  Can  we  con 
demn  his  conduct,  and  yet  justify  our  system  of  slavery?  or  can  we 
condemn  both,  and  yet  be  guiltless  if  we  use  no  efficient  exertions  to 
terminate  these  cruelties  among  us  ? 

5.  It  produces  general  licentiousness  among  the  slaves.  Marriage,  as  a 
civil  ordinance,  they  cannot  enjoy.  Our  laws  do  not  recognize  this 
relation  as  existing  among  them,  and  of  course  do  not  enforce  by  any 
sanction  the  observance  of  its  duties.  Indeed,  until  slavery  "  waxeth 
old  and  tendeth  to  decay,"  there  cannot  be  any  legal  recognition  of 
the  marriage  rite,  or  the  enforcement  of  the  consequent  duties.  For 


434  KENTUCKY    OPINIONS. 

all  regulations  on  this  subject  would  limit  the  master's  absolute  right 
of  property  in  his  slaves.  In  his  disposal  of  them,  he  would  no  longer 
be  at  liberty  to  consult  merely  his  own  interest.  He  could  no  longer 
separate  the  wife  and  husband  to  suit  the  convenience  or  interest  of 
the  purchaser,  no  matter  how  advantageous  might  be  the  terms  offered. 
And  as  the  wife  and  husband  do  not  always  belong  to  the  same  owner, 
and  are  not  often  wanted  by  the  same  purchaser,  their  duties  to  each 
other  would  thus,  if  enforced  by  law,  frequently  conflict  with  the  inter, 
ests  of  the  master.  Hence  all  the  marriage  that  could  ever  be  allowed 
to  them  would  be  a  mere  contract,  voidable  at  the  master's  pleasure. 
Their  present  quasi  marriages  are  just  such  contracts,  and  are  contin 
ually  thus  voided.  They  are  in  this  way  brought  to  consider  the  mat 
rimonial  engagement  as  a  thing  not  binding,  and  they  act  accordingly. 
Many  of  them  are  united  without  even  the  sham  and  forceless  cere 
mony  which  is  sometimes  used.  They,  to  use  their  own  phraseology, 
"  take  up  with"  each  other,  and  live  together  as  long  as  it  suits  their 
mutual  convenience  or  inclination.  This  wretched  system  of  concu 
binage  inevitably  produces  revolting  licentiousness.  This  feature  in 
the  slave  character  is  so  striking,  as  to  induce  in  many  minds  the  idea 
that  the  negro  is  naturally  repugnant  to  the  restraints  of  matrimony. 
From  the  ample  and  repeated  testimonies,  however,  of  such  travellers 
as  Park  and  Lander,  who  have  visited  this  race  in  their  native  land, 
we  learn  that  their  character  in  this  respect  is  in  Africa  the  reverse  of 
what  it  is  here  ;  that  they  regard  the  marriage  rite  with  remarkable 
sacredness,  and  scrupulously  fulfil  its  duties.  We  are  then  assured  by 
the  most  unquestionable  testimony  that  their  licentiousness  is  the 
necessary  result  of  our  system,  which,  destroying  the  force  of  the  mar 
riage  rite,  and  thus  in  a  measure  degrading  all  the  connection  between 
the  sexes  into  mere  concubinage,  solicits  wandering  desire,  and  leads 
to  extensive  profligacy.  Our  familiarity  with  this  consequence  of 
slavery  prevents  us  from  regarding  it  with  that  horror  which  it  would 
under  other  circumstances  inspire.  The  sacredness  of  the  marriage  rite 
is  the  bulwark  of  morality,  the  corner-stone  of  domestic  happiness.  It 
is  the  foundation  on  which  alone  the  whole  fabric  of  an  organized  and 
virtuous  community  can  be  built.  On  it  must  rest  all  those  family 
relations  which  bind  together  and  cement  society.  "Without  it,  we 
might  herd  together  like  brutes,  but  we  could  no  longer  live  together 
as  human  beings.  There  would  be  no  families,  no  strong  ties  of 
kindred,  no  domestic  endearments  softening  the  manners  and  curbing 
the  passions.  Selfish,  sensual,  and  unrestrained,  man  would  exercise 


ADDRESS  OF  THE  SYNOD.  435 

his  reason  only  to  minister  to  the  more  grovelling  propensities  of  his 
nature.  Any  set  of  men  will  approximate  to  this  condition  just  in  pro 
portion  to  their  approximation  to  the  practical  abolition  of  matrimonial 
restraints.  And  certainly  never,  in  any  civilized  country,  has  respect 
for  these  restraints  been  more  nearly  obliterated  than  it  has  been  among 
our  blacks.  Thus  the  working  of  our  system  of  slavery  diffuses  a 
moral  pestilence  among  its  subjects,  tending  to  wither  and  blight  every 
thing  that  is  naturally  beautiful  and  good  in  the  character  of  man.  Can 
this  system  be  tolerated  without  sin  ? 

6.  This  system  demoralizes  the  whites  as  well  as  the  blacks.  Masters 
are  in  a  great  degree  irresponsible  for  the  exercise  of  their  power ;  and 
they  generally  feel  that  their  object  in  possessing  and  exercising  their 
dominion  is  their  own  utility,  and  not  the  good  of  those  over  whom 
they  rule.  Now,  power  can  never  be  held  or  exercised  without  moral 
injury  to  its  possessor,  unless  its  exercise  be  subject  to  responsibility,  or 
unless  it  be  held  mainly  for  the  good  of  its  subjects,  not  of  its  possessor. 
The  lives  of  absolute  monarchs  furnish  us  with  our  most  disgusting 
pictures  of  human  depravity.  Few,  even  of  those  who  had  been  pre 
viously  trained  to  self-control  and  virtue,  have  been  able  to  withstand 
the  corrupting  influence  of  unrestrained  power.  And  the  effect  is  in 
some  measure  the  same  where  despotic  authority  is  possessed  and  ex 
ercised  in  a  smaller  sphere.  No  man,  acquainted  \vith  the  frailty  of  the 
human  heart,  would  desire  uncontrolled  dominion  over  his  fellow-men. 
We  are  sufficiently  prone  by  nature  to  tyranny  and  a  disregard  of  the 
rights  and  interests  of  others,  without  having  these  feelings  developed, 
cultivated,  and  matured  by  a  sense  of  irresponsibility,  and  by  the  habit 
of  regarding  ourselves  as  born  to  command,  and  others  as  born  to  obey. 
Where  a  consciousness  of  responsibility,  equality,  and  dependence, 
does  not  check  their  growth,  hard-heartedness,  selfishness,  and  arro 
gance  are  in  most  men  fearfully  exhibited.  And  these  odious  traits  of 
character  must  be  peculiarly  marked  in  those  who  have  from  childhood 
been  trained  in  the  school  of  despotism.  The  hand  of  one  of  our  greatest 
statesmen  has  strikingly  portrayed  the  demoralizing  effects  of  this 
system  on  the  minds  and  manners  of  the  ruling  class.  "  There  must 
doubtless,"  says  Mr.  Jefferson,  "be  an  unhappy  influence  on  the  manners 
of  our  people  produced  by  the  existence  of  slavery  among  us.  The  whole 
commerce  between  master  and  slave  is  a  perpetual  exercise  of  the  most 
boisterous  passions,  the  most  unrelenting  despotism  on  the  one  part, 
and  degrading  submission  on  the  other.  Our  children  see  this,  and 
learn  to  imitate  it ;  for  man  is  an  imitative  animal  This  quality  is  the 


436  KENTUCKY    OPINIONS. 

germ  of  all  education  in  him.  From  his  cradle  to  his  grave  he  is  learn 
ing  to  do  what  he  sees  others  do.  If  a  parent  could  find  no  motive 
either  in  his  philanthropy  or  his  self-love  for  restraining  the  intem 
perance  of  passion  towards  his  slave,  it  should  always  be  a  sufficient 
one  that  his  child  is  present.  But  generally  it  is  not  sufficient.  The 
parent  storms,  the  child  looks  on,  catches  the  lineaments  of  wrath,  puts 
on  the  same  airs  in  the  circle  of  smaller  slaves,  gives  a  loose  to  the 
worst  of  passions ;  and,  thus  nursed,  educated,  and  daily  exercised  in 
tyranny,  cannot  but  be  stamped  by  it  with  odious  peculiarities.  The 
man  must  be  a  prodigy  who  can  retain  his  manners  and  morals  unde- 
praved  by  such  circumstances."*  Such,  according  to  the  testimony  of 
one  who  had  marked  its  operation  with  a  philosopher's  eye,  is  the 
character  which  slavery  forms, — a  character  perfectly  the  reverse  of 
that  which  the  Gospel  requires. 

We  forbear  to  picture  before  you  the  consequences  of  that  indolence 
and  aversion  to  all  manual  occupations  which  are  necessarily  engen 
dered  in  youth  surrounded  by  a  servile  class  who  are  engaged  in  these 
pursuits.  These  consequences  you  have  all  seen  and  felt  and  deplored. 
Such  are  the  evil  effects  to  ourselves  and  our  children  of  the  system  which 
we  support.  Thus  we  are  made  to  eat  of  the  bitter  food  which  we  prepare 
for  others,  and  drink  of  the  poisoned  cup  which  our  own  hands  mingled  j 
the  sword  with  which  we  unthinkingly  destroy  others  is  thus  made  to 
drink  our  own  blood.  These  evils,  if  duly  estimated,  are  alone  sufficient 
to  arm  us  with  implacable  hostility  towards  the  system  from  which 
they  spring.  And,  in  view  of  these  effects,  we  can  almost  adopt  the 
opinion  expressed  a  few  years  since  on  the  scaffold,  by  one  who  was 
executed  for  the  murder  of  a  slave:  "Slavery  is  a  bad  system;  it  is 
even  worse  for  the  master  than  it  is  for  the  slaves."  It  is  a  system 
which  reminds  us  of  the  dark  magic  of  ancient  days,  an  art  as  fatal  to 
those  who  exercised  it  as  to  those  who  were  their  victims. 

7.  This  system  draws  down  upon  us  the  vengeance  of  Heaven.  "  God  is 
just,"  and  "  He  will  render  to  every  one  according  to  his  works." 
Oppression  can  never  escape  unpunished  while  He,  who  hath  emphati 
cally  declared  that  he  is  the  "Judge  of  the  widow"  and  "the  Father 
of  the  fatherless,"  is  on  the  throne  of  the  universe.  "  If  thou  forbear 
to  deliver  them  that  are  drawn  unto  death,  and  those  that  are  ready  to 
be  slain;  if  thou  sayest,  Behold,  we  knew  it  not ;  dotk  not  He  that  pon- 
dereth  the  heart  consider  it?  and  He  that  keepeth  thy  soul,  doth  not 

*  Jefferson's  Notes  on  Virginia,  p.  819. 


ADDKESS  OF  THE  SYNOD.  437 

He  know  it  ?  and  shall  He  not  render  to  every  man  according  to  hia 
works?"  Not  a  sparrow  falls  to  the  ground,  we  are  told,  without  the 
notice  of  God ;  how  much  more  doth  He  mark  the  abuse  and  oppression 
of  a  creature  who  bears  His  own  peculiar  image?  "The  very  hairs  of 
our  head  are  all  numbered ;"  much  more  are  the  groanings  of  the 
oppressed  and  the  sighings  of  the  prisoner  recorded  by  Him  who  says 
that  His  name  is  "Gracious,"  and  that  His  "ear  is  ever  open  to  the  cry 
of  the  poor  and  needy."  The  blood  of  Abel  did  not  soak  into  the 
ground  unheeded ;  it  called  down  judgment  upon  the  guilty  man  who 
had  smitten  his  brother,  and  it  drove  him  out  a  wanderer  from  the 
land  of  his  birth,  a  fugitive  from  the  presence  of  the  Lord.  But  the 
sore  cry  of  millions  of  the  down-trodden  has  gone  up  to  heaven  from 
the  midst  of  us ;  this  cry  is  still  swelling  upward ;  and  if  there  be 
righteousness  on  the  throne  of  the  universe,  it  must  bring  down  viala 
of  wrath  upon  the  heads  of  all  who  are  engaged  in  this  guilty  work. 
And  when  He  cometh  to  execute  vengeance,  "  who  may  abide  the  day 
of  His  coming?"  "Who  can  stand  before  His  indignation?  "Who  can 
stand  up  in  the  fierceness  of  His  anger?  We  see  the  truth  of  what 
the  prophet  declares,  that  "the  Lord  is  slow  to  anger;"  but  we  are 
assured  that  it  is  equally  true  that  He  is  "  great  in  power,  and  will  not 
at  all  acquit  the  wicked :  the  Lord  hath  His  way  in  the  whirlwind  and 
in  the  storm,  and  the  clouds  are  the  dust  of  His  feet." 

Brethren,  we  profess  to  be  Christians ;  we  reverence  the  holy  revela 
tion  which  God  has  given ;  we  look  to  its  precepts  for  guidance,  and  to 
its  denunciations  for  warnings.  We  know  that  the  principles  of  the 
divine  dealings  are  the  same  in  every  age,  and  that  what  God  said  to  those 
of  old,  when  we  are  in  similar  circumstances,  He  saith  unto  us.  Listen, 
then,  to  one  of  the  many  intimations  he  has  given  us  of  the  way  in 
which  He  regards  slavery,  and  the  way  in  which  He  will  punish  it. 
"The  people  of  the  land  have  used  oppression,  and  exercised  robbery, 
and  have  vexed  the  poor  and  needy;  yea,  they  have  oppressed  the 
stranger  wrongfully.  And  I  sought  for  a  man  among  them,  that  should 
stand  in  the  gap  before  me  for  the  land,  that  I  should  not  destroy  it :  but  I 
found  none.  Therefore  have  I  poured  out  mine  indignation  upon  them ;  I 
have  consumed  them  with  the  fire  of  my  wrath :  their  own  way  have  I 
recompensed  upon  their  heads,  saith  the  Lord  God."  Ezek.  xxii.  29-31. 
Can  we  despise  the  instructions  of  the  Almighty?  Shall  we  shut  our 
eyes  and  close  our  ears  against  the  admonitions  of  the  great  Judge  of 
the  earth  ?  Shall  we  not  arise  and  "  stand  in  the  gap  before  Him  for 
the  land,  that  He  may  not  destroy  it?"  Though  our  "nest  maybe 


438  KENTUCKY   OPINIONS. 

built  on  high,"  and  "our  defence  be  the  munitions  of  rocks,"  we  can 
not  escape,  if  G-od  rise  up  against  us.  He  can  blast  our  prosperity ;  He 
can  drown  us  in  blood;  He  can  blot  out  our  existence  and  our  name 
from  under  heaven. 

Let  us  remember  too,  that  not  only  as  a  people,  but  as  individuals, 
God  will  deal  with  us.  The  day  is  soon  coming  when  every  man's 
works  which  he  hath  wrought  shall  be  tried  as  by  fire,  and  we  must 
then  "  eat  of  the  fruits  of  our  own  ways." 

"We  have  now  exhibited  fairly,  but  briefly,  the  nature  and  effects  of 
slavery.  For  the  truth  of  our  facts  we  refer  to  your  own  observations ; 
for  the  correctness  of  our  reasoning  we  appeal  to  your  judgments  and 
consciences. 

*****  **# 

[After  considering  and  answering  various  objections,  the  committee 
submit  the  following  plan,  and  their  closing  appeal :] 

The  plan  which  we  propose  is,  for  the  master  to  retain,  during  a 
limited  period,  and  with  a  regard  to  the  real  welfare  of  the  slave,  that 
authority  which  he  before  held  in  perpetuity,  and  solely  for  his  own  in 
terest.  Let  the  full  future  liberty  of  the  slave  be  secured  against  all 
contingencies  by  a  recorded  deed  of  emancipation,  to  take  effect  at  a 
specified  time.  In  the  mean  while,  let  the  servant  be  treated  with  kind 
ness;  let  all  those  things  which  degrade  him  be  removed;  let  him 
enjoy  means  of  instruction ;  let  his  moral  and  religious  improvement 
be  sought ;  let  his  prospects  be  presented  before  him.  to  stimulate  him 
to  acquire  those  habits  of  foresight,  economy,  industry,  activity,  skill, 
and  integrity,  which  will  fit  him  for  using  well  the  liberty  he  is  soon  to 
enjoy.  That  master  is,  in  our  opinion,  doing  most  for  the  destruction 
of  this  system  who  thus  sets  in  operation  a  machinery  which,  in  a 
given  and  limited  period,  will  not  only  unbind  the  body  of  the  slave, 
but  will,  link  by  link,  and  in  the  only  way  in  which  it  can  be  effected, 
twist  off  the  fetters  that  now  cramp  his  soul.  If  the  master  retains 
his  authority  over  his  servants  only  for  a  time,  that  he  may  enjoy 
ampler  opportunities  of  employing  means  for  their  amendment  and  ele 
vation  ;  if  he  regards  them  as  a  trust  committed  to  him  by  his  Master 
and  theirs,  for  their  mutual  benefit,  and  no  longer  as  property,  of  which 
he  has  the  uncontrolled  disposal  for  his  own  selfish  ends ;  if  he  acts 
and  feels  thus,  he  is  not  only  free  from  guilt,  but  he  is  "  bringing  forth 
fruits  meet  for  repentance,"  he  is  doing  the  work  of  righteousness  and 
humanity. 


ADDRESS  OF  THE  SYNOD.  439 

Brethren,  there  are  three  courses  before  you,  one  of  which  you  must 
choose :  either  to  emancipate  immediately  and  without  preparation,  or 
to  pursue  some  such  plan  of  gradual  emancipation  as  we  propose,  or  to 
continue  to  lend  your  example  and  influence  to  perpetuate  slavery.  It 
is  improbable  that  you  will  adopt  the  first  course  ;  if  then  you  refuse  to 
concur  in  the  plan  of  gradual  emancipation  and  act  upon  it,  however 
you  may  lull  conscience,  you  are  lending  your  aid  to  perpetuate  a  de 
moralizing  and  cruel  system,  which  it  would  be  an  insult  to  God  to 
imagine  that  He  does  not  abhor ;  a  system  which  exhibits  power  with 
out  responsibility,  toil  without  recompense,  life  without  liberty,  law 
without  justice,  wrongs  without  redress,  infamy  without  crime,  punish 
ment  without  guilt,  and  families  without  marriage — a  system  which 
will  not  only  make  victims  of  the  present  unhappy  generation,  inflicting 
upon  them  the  degradation,  the  contempt,  the  lassitude,  and  the  anguish 
of  hopeless  oppression,  but  which  even  aims  at  transmitting  this  heri 
tage  of  injury  and  woe  to  their  children  and  their  children's  children, 
down  to  their  latest  posterity.  Can  any  Christian  contemplate  without 
trembling  his  own  agency  in  the  perpetuation  of  such  a  system  ?  And 
what  will  be  the  end  of  these  scenes  of  misery  and  vice  ?  Shall  we 
wait  until  worldly  politicians  and  legislators  may  rise  up  and  bid  them 
cease?  "We  ahall  wait  in  vain.  Already  have  we  heard  the  senti 
ment  proclaimed  from  high  places  and  by  the  voice  of  authority,  that  a 
race  of  slaves  is  necessary  to  the  existence  of  freedom.  Is  it  from 
those  who  utter  such  sentiments  that  we  expect  deliverance  to  come  ? 
No ;  reformation  must  commence  where  we  are  divinely  taught  that 
"judgment  mast  begin — at  the  house  of  God"  This  work  must  be  done; 
and  Christians  must  begin  it,  and  begin  it  soon,  or  wrath  will  come 
upon  us.  Tho  groans  of  millions  do  not  rise  forever  unheeded  before 
the  throne  of  the  Almighty.  The  hour  of  doom  must  soon  arrive,  the 
storm  must  soon  gather,  the  bolt  of  destruction  must  soon  be  hurled, 
and  the  guilty  must  soon  be  dashed  in  pieces.  The  voice  of  past  his 
tory  and  the  voice  of  inspiration  both  warn  us  that  the  catastrophe 
must  come,  unless  averted  by  repentance.  And  let  us  remember  that 
we  are  each  of  us  individually  responsible.  We  are  individually  assist 
ing  to  pile  up  this  mountain  of  guilt.  And  even  if  temporal  judgments 
do  not  fall  upon  our  day,  we  are  not  on  that_account  the  more  safe  from 
punishment.  If  we  "know  our  Lord's  will  and  do  it  not,  we  shall  be 
beaten  with  many  stripes."  The  sophistry  and  false  reasoning  by 
which  we  may  delude  our  own  souls,  will  not  blind  the  eyes  which 
"are  as  a  flame  of  fire."  A  few  years  at  most  will  place  us  where  we 


440  KENTUCKY    OPINIONS. 

would  gladly  give  all  the  slaves  of  a  universe  to  buy  off  the  punish 
ment  that  oppression  brings  down  upon  the  soul.  It  may  be  difficult  to 
do  our  duty,  but  it  will  be  far  more  difficult  to  stand  in  the  judgment 
without  having  done  it. 

Brethren,  we  have  done.  The  hour  is  coming  in  which  the  slave  and 
his  master  must  stand  together  before  the  tribunal  of  God,  a  God  who 
judges  righteously.  Are  you  prepared  to  place  yourselves  before  Him 
who  will  decide  upon  your  eternal  destiny,  and  say  that  you  have  done 
justice  to  those  whom  you  now  hold  in  bondage  ?  Are  you  prepared 
to  say,  "As  I  have  done  unto  these,  so  let  it  be  done  unto  me;  as  I 
have  showed  mercy,  so  let  me  receive  mercy  at  the  hands  of  my 
Judge."  Anticipate,  we  beseech  you,  the  feelings  and  decision  of  that 
great  day  which  is  fast  hastening  on ;  try  yourselves  now,  as  God  will 
then  try  you.  "What  doth  the  Lord  require  of  thee,  but  to  do  justly, 
to  love  mercy,  and  to  walk  humbly  with  your  God?"  Are  you  "doing 
justly"  while  you  retain  your  fellow-men  in  hopeless  bondage?  Are 
you  "  loving  mercy"  while  you  are  supporting  a  system  that  degrades 
and  brutalizes  beings  whom  God  created  in  His  own  image  ?  These 
are  solemn  questions.  Let  reason  answer  them,  and  let  conscience 
decide  your  future  course. 

JOHN  BROWN,   Chairman. 

JOHN  C.  YOUNG,  Secretary. 

The  foregoing  paper  calls  for  no  comment.  It  speaks 
for  itself ;  it  is  from  men  of  the  highest  character ;  and 
they  describe  the  system  of  slavery  as  it  existed  under 
their  oicn  observation. 

MOVEMENT   FOR    EMANCIPATION   IN    1849. 

The  next  step  of  public  importance  which  we  note, 
revealing  the  sentiments  of  the  people  of  Kentucky,  oc 
curred  in  1849.  The  Legislature  submitted  to  the  people 
the  question  of  calling  a  Convention  to  revise  the  State 
Constitution,  and  the  people  decided  affirmatively.  The 
subject  of  slavery  was 'a  main  topic  of  consideration  in  the 
canvass  for  the  Convention.  Many  citizens,  embracing 
many  of  the  largest  slaveholders,  were  in  favor  of  pro 
viding  in  the  new  or  revised  Constitution  for  the  removal 


PRINCIPLES    OF   THE    STATE    CONVENTION.  441 

of  the  system  from  the  State.  "  For  months  previous  to 
the  election  of  members  of  the  Convention  to  frame  a  new 
Constitution,  the  press  teemed  with  arguments  and  appeals, 
public  lecturers  and  orators  travelled  over  the  State  to 
address  the  people,  and  county  and  State  Conventions 
were  held  to  embody  and  express  the  sentiments  oi'  the 
contending  parties."* 

A  meeting  was  held  in  Lexington,  on  the  14th  of  April, 
1849,  which  is  thus  spoken  of: 

The  object  of  the  meeting  having  been  explained,  in  a  few  eloquent 
remarks  by  the  Hon.  Henry  Clay  and  Kev.  R.  J.  Breckinridge,  on 
motion  of  the  latter  gentleman,  the  following  resolutions  were  unani 
mously  adopted: 

1st.  That  this  meeting,  composed  of  citizens  of  the  county  of  Fayette, 
met  in  pursuance  of  public  notice,  to  consider  the  question  of  the  per 
petuation  of  slavery  in  this  Commonwealth,  considering  that  hereditary 
slavery,  as  it  exists  among  us,  (1)  Is  contrary  to  the  natural  rights  of 
mankind;  (2)  Is  opposed  to  the  fundamental  principles  of  free  goveyi- 
ment ;  (3)  Is  inconsistent  with  a  state  of  sound  morality ;  (4)  Is  hostile 
to  the  prosperity  of  the  Commonwealth ;  we  are  therefore  of  the  opinion 
that  it  ought  not  to  be  made  perpetual,  &c. 

The  second  resolution  recommended  the  holding  of  a 
State  Convention  at  Frankfort,  on  the  25th  of  April,  to 
consider  the  subject  of  emancipation,  and  appointed  thirty 
delegates.  At  this  Convention,  held  on  the  day  above 
named,  "the  Rev.  Dr.  R.  J.  Breckinridge  submitted  a 
document,  which,  after  being  amended  with  his  concur 
rence,  was  adopted." 

PRINCIPLES    OP    THE    STATE    CONVENTION. 

We  merely  give  the  preamble,  and  the  first  and  main 
point  of  the  paper,  as  all  that  is  essential  to  our  purpose, 

*  The  facts  stated  concerning  this  movement  for  Emancipation  in  Kentucky  in 
1&19,  we  take  mainly  from  an  article  in  the  Biblical  Repertory,  for  October  of  that 
year,  founded  on  an  Address  of  Dr.  R.  J.  Breckinridge,  entitled  "  The  Question  of 
Negro  Slavery,  and  the  New  Constitution  of  Kentucky."  This  Address  is  before  us. 


442  KENTUCKY    OPINIONS. 

showing  the  judgment  of  the  State  Convention  upon  the 
character  of  the  system  which  they  sought  to  remove. 
This  portion  of  the  document  is  as  follows  : 

This  Convention,  composed  of  citizens  of  the  Commonwealth  of  Ken 
tucky,  and  representing  the  opinions  and  wishes  of  a  large  number  of 
our  fellow-citizens  throughout  the  Commonwealth,  met  in  the  capitol  on 
the  25th  of  April,  1849,  to  consider  what  course  it  becomes  those  who 
are  opposed  to  the  increase  and  to  the  perpetuity  of  slavery  in  this  State 
to  pursue  in  the  approaching  canvass  for  members  of  the  Convention, 
called  to  amend  the  Constitution,  adopts  the  propositions  which  follow, 
as  expressing  its  judgment  in  the  premises  : 

1.  Believing  that  involuntary  hereditary  slavery,  as  it  exists  by  law 
in  this  State,  is  injurious  to  the  prosperity  of  the  Commonwealth,  incon 
sistent  with  the  fundamental  principles  of  free  government,  contrary  to 
the  natural  rights  of  mankind,  and  injurious  to  a  pure  state  of  morals, 
we  are  of  opinion  that  it  ought  not  to  be  increased,  and  that  it  ought 
not  to  be  perpetuated  in  this  Commonwealth. 

%The  other  propositions  of  the  paper,  three  in  number, 
relate  to  matters  of  detail  respecting  the  mode  recom 
mended  to  the  Constitutional  Convention  for  the  ultimate 
and  entire  removal  of  slavery  from  the  State.  This  paper 
is  signed  officially  by  "  Henry  Clay,  of  Bourbon,  Presi 
dent,"  and  by  several  Vice-Presidents  and  Secretaries. 

EMANCIPATIONISTS    DEFEATED. CAUSES. 

Dr.  R.  J.  Breckinridge  was  an  Emancipation  candidate 
for  the  State  Constitutional  Convention,  but  was  defeated  ; 
and  it  is  said,  that  "  not  more  than  one  or  two  emancipa 
tionists,  if  any,  according  to  the  public  papers,"  were 
"  elected."  When,  therefore,  the  Convention  assembled, 
instead  of  providing  for  emancipation, 'they  placed  barriers 
in  its  way  far  greater  than  existed  before  ;  making  a  course 
of  measures  of  some  six  or  seven  years  duration  necessary 
to  reach  the  practical  point  in  any  system  of  emancipation, 
immediate  or  gradual,  through  constitutional  and  legislative 


PRESBYTERIANS    FOR    EMANCIPATION.  443 

forms.  We  have  often  heard  it  said  in  Kentucky,  that 
while  the  largest  slaveholders  were  in  favor  of  emancipa 
tion  at  that  time,  the  non-slaveholding  vote  of  the  State 
gave  the  Convention  the  proslavery  character  it  pos 
sessed.* 

The  Repertory  thus  speaks  of  the  failure  of  the  emanci 
pation  cause,  and  of  the  agencies  employed  in  its  behalf: 

It  may  be  difficult  for  those  out  of  the  State  to  discern  all  the  causes  of 
this  lamentable  defeat.  There  are,  however,  some  things  connected  with 
the  subject  patent  to  every  observer.  In  the  first  place,  the  failure  of 
the  cause  of  emancipation  is  not  to  be  referred  to  any  want  of  ability  on 
the  part  of  its  advocates.  Those  advocates  comprise  some  of  the  most 
distinguished  men  not  only  of  Kentucky,  but  of  the  Union ;  men  who 
have  no  superiors  in  the  power  to  control  public  sentiment.  If  the  cause 
of  freedom  could  have  been  carried,  it  must  have  been  carried  by  such 
men.  If  any  appeals  could  produce  conviction,  it  would  have  been 
produced  by  the  address  mentioned  at  the  head  of  this  article.  Self- 
interest,  ignorance,  and  prejudice,  are  proof  against  any  thing ;  but  the 
human  mind,  when  unbiassed,  and  sufficiently  enlightened  to  compre 
hend  their  import,  cannot  resist  such  arguments,  nor  harden  itself 
against  such  sentiments  as  are  here  presented.  It  must  be  conceded, 
then,  that  the  cause  of  emancipation  in  Kentucky  has  failed  for  the 
present,  in  spite  of  the  exertions  of  men  of  the  highest  order  of  talents 
of  which  the  country  can  boast. 

PRESBYTERIANS    UNANIMOUSLY    FOR    EMANCIPATION. 

Again,  some  seem  disposed  to  refer  this  failure  to  the  lukewarmness 
of  the  Churches  in  Kentucky.  We  are  not  prepared  to  speak  on  this 
subject  for  other  Churches,  but  surely  this  reproach  cannot  fairly  be 
brought  against  our  own  Church.  The  Presbyterians  have  taken  the  lead 
in  this  struggle.  There  is  not  a  prominent  man  in  the  Synod  of  Ken 
tucky,  who  has  not  been  conspicuous  for  his  zeal  and  efforts  in  behalf 
of  emancipation.  ]STo  names  in  connection  with  this  subject  are  more 

*  The  Repertory  says  on  this  point :  "  The  impression  seems  very  general  that  the 
emancipationists  have  been  defeated  by  the  slaveholders.  This  is  a  great  mistake. 
A  large  and  most  influential  class  of  the  slaveholders  are  themselves  emancipation 
ists."  "The  fact,  therefore,  that  the  non-slaveholders  in  Kentucky  have  voted 
against  emancipation,  is  not  to  be  attributed  to  the  influence  of  the  slave-owners." 

20 


444  KENTUCKY    OPINIONS. 

prominent  than  those  of  Drs.  K.  J.  Breckiuridge,  John  C.  Young,  "Wil 
liam  L.  Breckinridge,  and  of  the  Rev.  Mr.  Robinson,  of  Frankfort.  As  far 
as  we  know,  there  is  not  a  single  Presl  y  terian  minister  whose  name  is 
found  among  the  advocates  of  slavery. 

We  give  these  extracts  because  they  state  the  case  better 
than  we  can  do,  and  because  we  wish  the  facts  to  go  forth 
with  greater  weight  than  our  individual  authority  could 
impart  to  them.  They  were  written  and  published  soon 
after  the  events  occurred,  and  we  are  not  aware  that  they 
have  ever  been  called  in  question.  The  material  facts 
which  bear  upon  our  immediate  purpose  are :  that  in  1849, 
"  Presbyterians"  took  "  the  lead"  in  Kentucky  for  eman 
cipation  ;  that  there  was  then  "  not  a  prominent  man  in  the 
Synod"  who  was  "  not  consjyicuous  for  his  zeal  in  behalf 
of  emancipation ;"  that  among  the  distinguished  "  names" 
than  which  none  were  "more  prominent,"  is  here  given 
"  the  Rev.  Mr.  Robinson,  of  Frankfort ;"  and  that  there 
was,  at  that  time,  "  not  a  single  Presbyterian  minister"  in 
the  Synod  of  Kentucky,  "  whose  name  was  found  among 
the  advocates  of  slavery  " 

DBS.    HUMPHREY    AND    W.    L.    BJRECKINRIDGE  UPON  EMANCI 
PATION    IN    1849. 

In  the  year  1850,  Drs.  William  L.  Breckinridge  and  E. 
P.  Humphrey  published  a  vindication  of  Dr.  E.  D.  Mac 
Master  from  the  aspersions  cast  upon  him  by  Dr.  1ST.  L. 
Rice,  in  which  they  bear  the  following  testimony  to  the 
position  taken  by  Presbyterian  ministers,  elders,  and 
Church-members,  in  Kentucky,  for  emancipation  : 

It  is  well  known  that  during  the  past  year  a  movement  was  made  for 
emancipation, — that  is,  the  ultimate  extinction  of  slavery, — in  the  State 
of  Kentucky.  The  first  public  meeting  on  this  subject,  of  which  we 
heard,  was  addressed  by  two  Presbyterian  ministers.  The  address  to 
the  friends  of  the  cause  throughout  the  State,  calling  a  convention  at 
the  seat  of  Government,  was  drawn  up  by  a  Presbyterian  minister, 


POSITION    OF    DR.    R.    J.    BRECKINRIDGE    IN  1849.       41-3 

When  the  Convention  met,  in  April,  1849,  there  appeared,  among  its 
members,  more  than  twenty  Presbyterian  ministers  and  ruling  elders. 
*  *  *  The  Presbyterian  ministers  in  Kentucky,  so  far  as  we  know, 
almost  without  exception,  and  the  great  body  of  the  ruling  elders  and  pri 
vate  members  of  the  Churches,  concurred  in  these  views  expressed  by  the  Con-  . 
vention  [referring  to  the  paper  adopted  as  given  above].  Nor  have  we 
heard  of  any  expression  of  the  public  sentiment  of  the  Church  at  large, 
censuring  them  in  this  behalf.* 

According  to  this  testimony,  from  two  gentlemen  who 
were  at  the  time  Pastors  of  Churches  in  the  city  of  Louis 
ville,  the  vast  body  of  ministers,  elders,  and  people  of  the 
Presbyterian  Church  in  Kentucky,  were,  in  1849,  in  favor 
of  the  removal  of  slavery  from  the  State. 

POSITION    OF    DR.    R.    J.    BRECKINRIDGE    IN    1849. 

The  stand  taken  by  Dr.  R.  J.  Breckinridge  is  already 
shown  by  the  resolutions  he  introduced,  and  which  were 

*  The  direct  purpose  of  the  article  from  which  we  here  quote,  was  not  to  exhibit 
the  sentiments  of  the  writers  or  those  of  the  people  of  Kentucky  upon  slavery. 
This  is  dune  very  fully  and  satisfactorily,  but  it  was  only  incidental  to  their  main 
object.  As  said  above,  their  direct  aim  was  to  vindicate  a  distinguished  Theological 
Professor  from  the  charge  of  being  a  disturber  of  the  Church  in  propagating  ultra- 
abolition  doctrines,  brought  against  him  by  Dr.  Rice.  They  do  this  triumphantly, 
by  showing:  (1.)  That  Dr.  MacMaster  simply  held  the  views  formally  set  forth  by 
the  Church  in  which  he  was  a  minister;  (2.)  That  these  views  were  the  same  as 
Professors  in  other  seminaries  held;  (3.)  That  they  were  the  same  as  had  been 
acknowledged  by  the  ministers,  elders,  and  people  of  Kentucky  in  1849;  (4.) 
That  even  Dr.  Rice  himself  had  professed  to  approve  the  action  of  Presbyterians  in 
Kentucky  in  1S49  ;  (5.)  And  that,  so  far  from  having  been  a  disturber  of  the  Chinch, 
the  whole  course  of  Dr.  MacMaster  showed,  as  illustrated  by  specific  facts  which 
they  cite,  that  he  had  been  specially  prudent,  and  had  said  and  done  very  little  upon 
the  subject  of  slavery;  far  less,  indeed,  in  the  line  of  writing  and  lecturing,  than  the 
man  who  had  assailed  him.  Immediately  following  the  quotation  given  above,  Drs. 
Breckinridge  and  Humphrey  say  :  "But  what  does  Dr.  Rice  think  of  them  [people 
of  Kentucky]  and  their  movement  ?  They  have  said  full  as  much  as  Dr.  MacMaster 
has  said  against  slavery,  and  they  have  done  a  vast  deal  more.  If  he  must  be  dis 
franchised,  proscribed,  and  hunted  down,  what  is  due  to  those  whose  little  fingers 
are  thicker  than  his  loins?  *  *  *  This  would  seem  to  be  sufficient  to  show  that 
Dr.  Rice's  clamor  against  Dr.  MacMaster  is  without  the  shadow  of  foundation. 
*  *  *  We  find  in  Dr.  MacMoster's  views  on  the  subject,  no  objection  to  him  as  a 
friend,  as  a  minister,  or  as  a  Professor," 


446  KENTUCKY    OPINIONS. 

adopted  in  the  Fayette  County  meeting,  and  again  by  the 
paper  adopted  by  the  State  Emancipation  Convention 
which  he  presented.  During  the  canvass  for  the  State 
Constitutional  Convention,  Dr.  Breckinridge  issued  an 
Address  to  the  people,  on  "  The  Question  of  Negro  Sla 
very  and  the  New  Constitution,"  from  which  we  give  a 
few  sentences  showing  the  character  of  the  institution  of 
slavery  in  his  judgment,  and  the  course  he  urged  the  people 
to  take. 

In  the  following  paragraph  he  gives  a  graphic  view  of 
proslavery  statements : 

The  bulk,  however,  of  the  proslavery  candidates  for  the  convention 
and  the  bulk. of  that  party,  so  far  from  agreeing  that  slavery  is  an  evil 
— which  it  is  the  misfortune  of  the  State  to  be  obliged  to  tolerate — pro 
fess  to  consider  it  a  great  advantage  and  blessing,  which  it  is  our  duty 
to  foster,  to  enlarge,  and  to  perpetuate.  They  desire  to  surround  it 
with  new  constitutional  guarantees,  to  make  it  more  difficult  to  be 
abolished,  in  all  time  to  come ;  and  to  secure  the  constitutional  prohibi 
tion  of  manumissions  within  this  State,  and  the  constitutional  guarantee 
of  slave  importations  into  it.  The  burden  of  their  disquisitions  is  the 
divine  origin  of  the  right  of  property  of  man  in  man,  the  marked  appro 
val  of  slavery  by  Christ  and  His  Apostles — the  immense  superiority  of 
the  people  in  slaveholding  communities  to  all  other  people — the  vast 
advantages  of  slavery,  in  a  moral,  social,  and  pecuniary  point  of  view ; 
the  licentiousness,  poverty,  and  degradation  of  the  poor  whites  in  all 
countries  where  there  are  no  slaves ;  the  turpitude,  folly,  and  impracti 
cability  of  all  schemes  of  emancipation ;  the  utter  unfitness  of  negroes 
for  any  other  condition  than  slavery ;  and,  as  the  conclusion  of  the  whole, 
the  necessity  for  a  larger  surrender  of  power  by  the  people  in  the  new 
constitution  in  regard  to  slavery,  in  order  that  the  institution  may  be 
placed  on  a  footing  at  once  more  firm  and  more  durable.  I  am  aware 
that  unless  some  collector  of  the  essays,  circulars,  handbills,  speeches, 
pamphlets,  and  newspaper  articles  to  which  our  present  discussions  have 
given  birth,  shall  transmit  to  posterity  a  fair  sample  of  the  political 
literature  of  our  day,  our  children  will  hardly  believe  that  such  things 
were  possible.  In  point  of  fact,  the  statements  I  have  made  come  short 
of  what  I  hear  and  read  every  day. 


POSITION    OF    DR.    R.  ,T.    BRECKIXRIDGE    IX    1849.       447 

In  the  following  paragraphs,  Dr.  Breckinriclge  shows 
the  character  and  influence  of  the  system  of  slavery,  and 
appeals  to  the  people  in  thrilling  terms  to  take  such  a 
course  as  shall  prevent  its  further  increase  and  work  its 
entire  removal: 

How  clear  is  it,  that  Kentucky  should  place  in  a  convention  invested 
with  such  transcendent  powers,  none  but  pure,  wise,  enlightened,  and 
trustful  men ;  and  that  such  men,  when  they  are  met,  should  act  for 
Kentucky;  for  all  Kentucky,  and  for  her  highest  and  largest  good;  and 
that  Kentucky,  therefore,  is  the  great  party  in  these  affairs ! 

Now  is  it  for  the  interest,  the  honor,  the  riches,  the  power,  the  glory, 
the  peace,  the  advancement,  the  happiness,  of  this  great  Commonwealth, 
to  exert  her  sovereign  power  in  such  a  way,  and  to  the  intent,  that 
involuntary,  hereditary,  domestic  negro  slavery  shall  be  indefinitely  in 
creased  and  everlastingly  established  in  her  bosom?  Men  of  Kentucky, 
ask  yourselves  that  question ;  then  lay  your  hands  upon  your  hearts 
and  answer  it  1  Is  it  her  bounden  duty  to  increase  and  to 
perpetuate  an  institution  which  the  whole  civilized  world  except  the 
fifteen  slave  States  on  this  continent,  and  the  Empire  of  Brazil,  unites 
in  condemning  and  denouncing  ?  Is  it  her  sacred  duty  to  set  at  defi 
ance  the  voice  of  the  human  race  ?  Is  it  laid  upon  her  by  an  irresist 
ible  obligation  to  d<  this  in  the  face  of  a  world  struggling  for  freedom, 
and  looking  to  thi>  country  for  examples  of  liberty,  justice,  and  right? 
*  *  *  I  shall  xiot  speak  of  the  private  condition  of  slaves,  or  their 
individual  treatment.  What  now  concerns  us  is  the  state  of  public  law. 
The  law,  as  to  all  other  subjects,  is  often  better  on  the  statute-book 
than  in  practice ;  for  the  conduct  of  men  is  not  always  as  good  as  their 
principles,  or  professions.  On  this  subject,  it  is  my  opinion  that  the 
law  is  worse  than  the  practice  under  it ;  and  this  is  one  of  the  anomalies 
of  slavery,  that  the  evil  element  in  it  constantly  gets  the  mastery.  Slavery, 
as  it  exists  by  law  in  this  State,  presents  this  aspect:  1st.  The  rights 
of  property  are  absolutely  and  universally  abolished,  as  to  the  slaves. 
2d.  The  rights  of  person  and  character  are  unknown,  as  to  them,  except 
as  the  interest  of  the  master  and  the  public  peace  may  demand  the  re 
cognition.  3d.  The  institution  of  marriage,  as  between  slaves,  has  no 
legal  recognition,  nor  do  marital  rights  exist  as  to  them.  4th.  The  re 
lation  of  parent  and  child,  as  between  slaves,  is  not  recognized  by  the 
law,  except  in  determining  questions  of  property.  Now  it  is  perfectly 


448  KENTUCKY    OPINIONS. 

obvious  that  every  one  of  these  rights  is  inherent  in  human  nature, 
and  that  their  existence  and  their  protection  lie  at  the  foundation  of 
human  society,  which  could  not  exist  for  a  day,  under  any  form,  if  these 
rights  were  universally  abolished.  Moreover,  they  are  all  of  divine 
authority ;  and  as  the  State  itself — that  is,  human  society — is  ordained 
of  God,  we  have  one  of  G-od's  institutions  abolishing,  as  to  immense 
numbers  of  His  rational  creatures,  the  very  foundations  on  which  He  has 
erected  that  institution,  and  rendered  possible  the  social  state  He  or 
dained  for  those  creatures.  This  is  a  condition  of  things  for  whose  in 
crease  there  can  be  no  justification ;  and  whose  everlasting  continuance 
can  be  defended  only  upon  grounds  which  subvert  the  order  of  nature, 
the  ordinations  of  heaven,  and  the  foundations  of  the  social  state. 
*  *  *  Our  divine  religion  has  been  invoked  against  us.  God,  the 
creator  of  man,  and  his  infinite  benefactor,  it  is  constantly  alleged,  is  the 
great  Author  of  the  institution  by  which  man  has  the  most  effectually 
defaced  God's  image  in  man.  Jesus  of  Nazareth,  the  friend  of  sinners, 
meant,  we  are  told,  by  His  great  law  of  love,  that  man  should  enslave 
his  fellow-man;  by  His  sublime  revelation  of  the  universal  bond  of  hu 
man  brotherhood,  to  teach  us  that  we  might  afflict  and  crush  all  around 
us ;  by  His  royal  law  of  doing  to  others  as  we  wish  them  to  do  to  us,  to 
give  us  a  rule  by  which  to  limit  and  restrict  our  bowels  of  compassion 
within  rational  bounds !  These  are  great  expositions ;  and  the  more  to 
be  cordially  received,  as  they  are  uttered  by  those  having  no  sort  of 
interest  or  motive  in  perverting  the  word  of  God ;  and  as  they  accord 
so  precisely  with  the  whole  sentiments  of  God's  people  throughout  all 
ages!  Look  around  you,  my  countrymen.  On  which  side  of  these 
questions  is  the  great  body  of  the  disciples  of  Jesus  Christ?  On 
which  side  are  to  be  found  the  most  of  those  who  seem  to  you  to 
understand,  to  practise,  and  to  love  God's  law  ?  Why  do  you  hear  in 
popular  addresses,  and  read  in  resolutions  of  popular  assemblies,  such 
denunciations  of  the  Ministers  of  the  Gospel,  whose  abuse  is  a  staple 
theme,  in  a  large  portion  of  the  slavery  party?  Ask  your  hearts,  is  not 
all  this  natural — is  it  not  all  just  what  might  have  been  expected  ?  Ask 
the  fiercest  of  those  who  denounce  us,  whether,  in  their  calm  moments, 
they  think  Christian  people  and  Christian  ministers  had  better  plead  for 
or  against  the  suffering  and  the  oppressed — for  or  against  the  liberties 
of  mankind?  What  is  happening  around  us,  has  happened  every 
where.  What  men  have  blushed  to  advocate  upon  their  own  respon 
sibility,  they  have  endeavored  to  justify  in  the  name  of  the  adorable 
God,  and  then  traduced  His  servants  for  bearing  testimony  against 


HON.    GARRETT    DAVIS    ON    SLAVERY    IN    1849.        449 

them.  But  has  that  arrested  the  arm  of  the  Lord  ?  Follow  His  glorious 
word  across  the  track  of  ages,  and  make  with  it  the  circuit  of  the 
world.  Where  was  this  institution  of  hereditary  slavery  ever  abolished, 
where  a  divine  revelation  had  not  come?  Where,  on  the  other  hand, 
has  hereditary  slavery  held  its  ground  unshaken,  in  the  midst  of  the 
light  of  this  Heaven-descended  truth?  Surely  God's  people  know,  if 
anybody  knows,  what  is  God's  mind.  Surely  God's  word,  by  means  of 
His  word,  is  a  reliable  exposition  of  what  He  designed  that  word  to  ac 
complish. 

The  record  which  is  thus  made  by  the  Emancipation 
party  in  Kentucky,  in  1849,  is  one,  in  our  judgment,  of 
which  the  persons  concerned  will  never  have  cause  to  be 
ashamed.  They  took  their  noble  stand  in  a  great  popular 
movement  on  the  side  of  right;  and  though  defeated,  they 
were  not  dishonored.  It  is  no  doubt  quite  as  clear  now, 
— and  perhaps  far  more  palpable,  as  seen  in  the  perils  that 
are  now  upon  the  State  and  the  Nation,  growing  out  of 
slavery, — to  all  the  surviving  actors  who  favored  emanci 
pation  in  1849,  as  well  as  to  those  who  opposed  them,  that 
it  would  have  been  infinitely  better  for  the  State,  had  the 
people  at  large  concurred  in  the  system  then  sought  to  be 
inaugurated. 

HON.    GARRETT    DAVIS    ON    SLAVERY    IN    1849. 

Mr.  Davis,  now  in  the  United  States  Senate  from  Ken 
tucky,  was  a  member  of  the  Constitutional  Convention 
held  in  1849.  In  a  discussion  on  slavery  in  that  body,  he 
is  reported  as  saying : 

But  it  appears  to  me  that  any  intelligent  and  carefully  reflecting  mind 
must  come  to  the  conclusion  that  slavery  is  to  have  but  a  transitory 
existence  in  Kentucky.  The  general  sentiment  of  the  world  is  against 
it,  before  which,  in  fifty  years,  it  has  receded  vastly ;  and  this  senti 
ment  is  deeply  and  widely  formed  in  our  limits,  and  among  our  own 
people.  *  *  *  The  history  of  slavery,  as  we  have  it,  proves  in  all 
ages  the  past  that  it  is  progressing  to  its  end.  That  consummation 


450  KENTUCKY    OPINIONS. 

is  in  the  course  of  events,  and  when  men  throw  themselves  in  the 
current  of  events  to  hasten,  or  to  retard,  they  are  but  straw*.  Let 
all  straws  be  kept  out  of  that  section  of  this  resistless  current  which 
flows  through  Kentucky,  and  let  it  roll  on  in  its  undisturbed  power. 

We  have  said  that  those  who  took  bold  and  decided 
ground  for  emancipation  then,  made  up  an  enduring  and 
honorable  record.  This  is  especially  true  of  the  Presby 
terian  clergy.  Their  posterity  will  not  be  ashamed  of 
them. 

A    GLORIOUS    RECORD    TARNISHED. 

But  where  do  we  find  some  of  them  now?  On  which 
side  are  they  battling  about  slavery  now, — not  as  the  insti 
tution  was  then,  reposing  in  peace,  but — when  it  has  risen 
up  in  its  treasonable  rage  and  is  filling  the  land  with  car 
nage  and  wailing;  when  it  is  carrying  fire  and  sword  to 
the  homes  of  Kentucky;  and  when  all  this  is  undertaken 
and  prosecuted  for  the  sole  purpose  of  perpetuating  for 
ever  the  system  which  in  1849  the  Presbyterians  of  Ken 
tucky  wished,  unanimously,  to  remove  from  among  them? 

The  "  Rev.  Mr.  Robinson,  of  Frankfort,"  so  "  conspicuous 
for  his  zeal  in  behalf  of  emancipation"  in  1849,  is  Dr. 
Stuart  Robinson,  of  Toronto,  Canada,  now  editor  of  The 
True  Presbyterian,  issued  in  Louisville,  Kentucky.  That 
paper,  as  we  have  proved  in  a  previous  chapter,  is  filled 
with  treason  against  the  Government,  and  is  aiding  the 
rebellion  as  far  as  it  dare  go  in  that  direction.  It  of  course 
advocates  the  system  of  slavery  out  of  which  the  rebellion 
has  arisen.  Number  after  number  of  that  paper  has  been 
mainly  devoted  to  a  vindication  of  slavery  from  the 
extremest  proslavery  position  taken  by  the  leaders  of  the 
rebellion  in  the  South.  In  181-9,  his  "  zeal"  was  "con 
spicuous"'  in  maintaining  the  principles  of  the  Emancipa 
tion  State  Convention  of  Kentucky,  which  declared  slavery 


A    GLORIOUS    RECORD    TARNISHED.  451 

to  be  "  contrary  to  the  natural  rights  of  mankind,  and 
injurious  to  a  pure  state  of  morals."  In  1862,  '63,  "64, 
when  the  nation  is  struggling  for  its  life,  against  the  foul 
est  rebellion  the  earth  ever  saw, — a  rebellion  begun  in  the 
name  of  slavery,  urged  on  for  the  sake  of  slavery,  fighting 
for  slavery,  living  for  slavery,  worshipping  slavery,  doom 
ing  a  whole  generation  of  its  young  men  to  a  cruel  death 
for  slavery,  and  aiming  to  supplant  universal  liberty  for 
slavery, — Dr.  Robinson's  "  zeal"  is  made  "  conspicuous" 
in  using  all  his  power,  through  his  paper,  to  convince  the 
"  Presbyterians"  of  Kentucky,  hitherto  opposed  to  slavery, 
that  the  system  among  them  which  they  formerly  denounced 
is  "  divine,"  an  "  ordinance  of  God,"  justified  by  law  and 
by  Gospel,  the  best  condition  for  the  negro  race,  in  accord 
ance  with  the  law  of  nature,  and  all  the  other  fine  things 
which  Southern  rebels  say  of  it ;  while,  to  dissent  from 
this,  to  speak  of  slavery  as  did  the  Emancipation  Conven 
tion  of  Kentucky  in  whose  behalf  his  "  zeal"  was  once 
"conspicuous,"  is  "infidelity"  in  any  man,  and  for  the 
Church  to  do  this  is  incurable  "apostasy." 

This  is  his  former  record  ;  and  this  is  his  present  one. 
We  wish  it  could  be  said  with  truth  that  other  Presby 
terian  ministers  and  members  stand  where  they  were  all 
reported  as  standing  fifteen  years  ago.  But  it  is  unques 
tionably  true  that  many  of  them,  judging  from  the  edi 
torials,  correspondents,  and  support  given  to  The  True 
Presbyterian,  have  repudiated  their  former  record,  and 
now  stand  for  the  twin-powers,  slavery  and  rebellion. 
20* 


452  MODERN    SOUTHERN    VIEWS    OF    SLAVERY. 


CHAPTER  XII. 

MODERN"   SOUTHERN  VIEWS   OF   SLAVERY. 

WE  have  shown  at  some  length,  in  previous  chapters, 
the  opinions  entertained  of  slavery  as  an  institution,  both 
at  the  North  and  in  the  South,  by  the  Church,  by  states 
men,  and  by  the  people,  from  before  the  establishment  of 
the  National  Government  down  to  a  period  within  some 
thirty  years ;  and  they  exhibit,  with  rare  exceptions,  a 
concurrent  testimony  against  the  system,  on  grounds  both 
of  principle  and  policy.  Divines  and  statesmen,  during 
the  earlier  period,  as  well  in  those  States  where  it  was 
established  as  elsewhere,  regarded  it  as  an  evil  to  be  toler 
ated  rather  than  justified,  and  many  of  them  hoped  for  its 
ultimate  removal  from  the  country,  and  aided  schemes  of 
emnncipation  with  that  end  in  view. 

During  the  later  period,  a  total  revolution  in  opinion 
has  obtained  in  the  States  in  rebellion,  embracing  the 
Church  and  the  world  together,  which  has  been  for  many 
years  practically  universal.  It  now  approves  what  it  once 
condemned,  applauds  what  it  once  lamented,  justifies  what 
it  once  tolerated,  blesses  what  it  once  denounced,  and 
places  under  the  divine  sanction  wrhat  it  formerly  con 
signed  to  God's  withering  curse. 

As  this  change  in  Southern  opinion  is  the  fruitful  germ 
which  has  brought  forth  this  monstrous  rebellion,  we  pro 
pose  in  this  chapter  to  give  some  examples  of  the  present 
status  of  this  opinion,  confining  ourselves  as  before  chiefly 
to  the  Church,  as  seen  in  the  views  of  leading  divines  and 
ecclesiastical  bodies.  There  is  nothing  in  this  aspect  of 


DEFENDED  BY  NORTHERN  MEN.  453 

the  subject  which  requires  that  we  should  present  this 
testimony  in  the  chronological  order  of  its  utterance.  It 
rather  seems  appropriate  that  we  should  exhibit  some  of 
the  later  expressions  of  opinion  first,  that  we  may  see  to 
what  they  have  grown,  and  the  baldness  and  boldness 
with  which  they  are  announced.  We  shall  show,  also,  at 
the  conclusion  of  this  chapter,  the  development  and  pro 
gress  of  this  modern  opinion  in  the  South  in  the  order  of 
time,  and  thus  show  how  far  the  Church  is  responsible 
for  leading  and  misleading  the  men  of  the  world.  Our 
chief  object,  however,  is  to  set  forth  the  sharp  contrast 
between  present  and  former  opinions  in  the  same  section 
of  countnr. 

DEFENDED    BY    NORTHERN    MEN. 

We  have  entitled  this  chapter,  "Modern  Southern 
Views  of  Slavery,"  because  the  opinions  here  presented 
are  mostly  entertained  in  the  South.  But  it  will  be  seen, 
that  among  their  stanchest  advocates  are  found  divines 
in  the  free  and  in  the  Border  slave  States.  And  what  is 
a  most  significant  fact  in  this  connection  is,  that  at  no 
time  since  the  existence  of  our  Government  have  promi 
nent  Northern  men  been  so  bold  in  advocating  and  defend 
ing  slavery, — many  of  them  going  to  the  extreme  length 
of  modern  Southern  opinion,  and  justifying  it  on  every 
ground,  human  and  divine, — as  since  the  beginning  of  the 
rebellion  caused  by  slavery,  and  during  a  short  time  pre 
vious,  when  the  determination  openly  to  resist  the  Govern 
ment  for  the  sake  of  slavery  was  in  process  of  maturing. 
Volumes  and  pamphlets,  of  various  ponderosity  in  size  and 
argument,  have  been  written  by  Bishop  Hopkins,  Presi 
dent  Lord,  Dr.  Seabury,  Professor  Morse,  and  other  men 
of  eC[ual  and  some  of  less  distinction.  Besides  these, 
sermons  have  been  issued,  and  portions  of  the  periodical 


454  MODERN    SOUTHERN    VIEWS    OF    SLAVERY. 

press  have  come  to  the  rescue ;  while  at  least  one  pro 
fessedly  religious  newspaper  in  Kentucky,  conducted  and 
supported  by  Presbyterians,  is  battling  lustily  and  con 
stantly  as  no  religious  journal  within  the  State  has  ever 
been  known  to  do  before,  going  the  full  length  of  the  most 
ultra  Southern  extremists  in  vindication  of  the  system,  and 
commending  with  special  earnestness  the  works  and 
writers  to  which  we  refer.  There  is  a  certain  significance 
in  these  things  which  may  be  very  puzzling  to  philoso 
phers  or  very  easy  of  solution  to  plain  men. 

POSITIONS   TAKEN. 

We  state  the  positions  which  the  modern  defenders  of 
slavery  take,  and  give  from  their  writings  quotations 
which  illustrate  them,  classifying  both  under  two  general 
heads :  the  sanction  given  to  slavery  by  the  Law  of 
Nature  /  and  the  sanction  claimed  for  it  in  the  Word  of 
God 

It  must  be  borne  in  mind,  as  vital  in  the  issue,  that 
these  positions,  and  the  authorities  and  reasons  for  thorn, 
are  presented  by  those  who  assert  them  not  only  to  cover 
slavery  in  former  times  and  in  other  nations,  but  are 
designed  to  exhibit  the  grounds  on  which  the  present  sys 
tem  of  Negro  Slavery  in  the  South  is  vindicated  and  sanc 
tioned. 

The  views  taken  of  the  system  by  Southern  extremists 
and  their  Northern  u  allies,"  though  ditfermg  somewhat 
among  their  defenders,  may  be  substantially  reduced  to 
the  following  form  : 

I.  That  slavery  is  in  no  sense  the  creature  of  local  law, 
or  indeed  of  any  law  of  man,  but  is  based  upon  the  Law 
of  Nature;  that  it  is  normally  universal,  found  among  all 
states  of  society  and  in  every  nation  where  it  has  not  been 
positively  prohibited,  and  has  existed  from  the  origin  of 


AUTHORITIES    FOB   THESE   POSITIONS.  455 

the  race  to  the  present  time  ;  and  that,  therefore,  "  slavery 
is  not  municipal  but  natural,"  while  u  it  is  abolition  which 
is  municipal  and  local:"  the  grand  conclusion  from  all 
which  is,  that  Negro  Slavery  as  it  exists  in  the  United 
States  is  sustained  by  these  sanctions. 

II.  That  slavery  exists  by  the  positive  statutes  of  Divine 
Revelation  ;  that  it  is  sanctioned  in  the  Decalogue,  is  an 
institution  of  the  patriarchal  age,  has  the  approbation  of 
the  Mosaic  code,  was  approved  by  all  the  prophets,  and  is 
interwoven  with  the  whole  history  and  ordinances  of  the 
Jewish  Church  ;  that  it  was  sanctioned  and  regulated  by 
Christ  and  the  Apostles,  and  existed  in  the  New  Testa 
ment  Church  which  they  established;  that  it  is  placed  by 
the  Scriptures  on  the  same  footing  with  the  civil,  connu 
bial,  and  parental  relations,  and  is  therefore  "  an  ordinance 
of  God"  of  the  same  character  with  them,  in  its  rights, 
interests,  duties,  and  permanency ;  that  the  system  in  the 
Southern  States  is  the  fulfilment  of  the  prophetic  curse 
upon  Can  aim  the  son  of  Ham  ;  that  it  is  essential  to  the 
intellectual  and  moral  elevation  of  the  negro  race  in  the 
South  ;  that  it  is  the  proper  system  for  the  evangelization 
of  heathen;  and  that,  as  to  the  type  of  Southern  negro 
slavery  in  particular,  "  it  might  have  existed  in  Paradise 
and  may  continue  through  the  Millennium  :"  the  grand  con 
clusion  from  all  which  is,  that  Negro  Slavery  as  it  exists 
in  the  United  States  is  sustained  by  these  sanctions. 

AUTHORITIES    FOR    THESE    POSITIONS. 

We  select  a  few  passages  out  of  enough  to  fill  a  volume, 
which  it  will  be  seen  fully  cover  all  the  points  in  the  fore 
going  paragraphs.  We  take  them  in  such  order,  as  far  as 
convenience  of  extracting  will  admit,  as  will  show  their 
bearing  upon  each  of  the  positions  in  the  order  in  which 
they  are  announced. 


456  MODEBN    SOUTHERN   VIEWS    OF    SLAVERY. 

I.  As  related  to  Natural  and  Municipal  Law. 

KEY.  JAMES  H.  THORNWELL,  D.  D.,  of  Columbia,  S.  C.:  "It  has  been 
contended  that  the  right  of  property  in  slaves  is  the  creature  of  positive 
statute,  and,  consequently,  of  force  only  within  the  limits  of  the  juris 
diction  of  the  law.  *  *  *  Slavery  has  never,  in  any  country,  so  far 
as  we  know,  arisen  under  the  operation  of  statute  law.  It  is  not  a  muni 
cipal  institution — it  is  not  the  arbitrary  creature  of  the  State,  it  has  not 
sprung  from  the  mere  force  of  legislation.  Law  defines,  modifies,  and 
regulates  it,  as  it  does  every  other  species  of  property,  but  law  never 
created  it.  The  law  found  it  in  existence,  and,  being  in  existence,  the 
law  subjects  it  to  fixed  rules.  On  the  contrary,  what  is  local  and  muni 
cipal,  is  the  abolition  of  slavery.  The  States  that  are  now  non-slavehold- 
ing  have  been  made  so  by  positive  statute.  Slavery  exists,  of  course,  in 
every  nation  in  which  it  is  not  prohibited.  It  arose  in  the  progress  of 
human  events,  from  the  operation  of  moral  causes ;  it  has  been 
grounded  by  philosophers  in  moral  maxims ;  it  has  always  been  held  to 
be  moral  by  the  vast  majority  of  the  race.  No  age  has  been  without 
it.  From  the  first  dawn  of  authentic  history  until  the  present  period, 
it  has  come  down  to  us  through  all  the  course  of  ages.  We  find  it 
among  nomadic  tribes,  barbarian  hordes,  and  civilized  States.  Wherever 
communities  have  been  organized,  and  any  rights  of  property  have  been 
recognized  at  all,  there  slavery  is  seen.  If,  therefore,  there  be  any 
property  which  can  be  said  to  be  founded  in  the  common  consent  of  the 
human  race,  it  is  the  property  in  slaves.  If  there  be  any  property  that 
can  be  called  natural,  in  the  sense  that  it  spontaneously  springs  up  in 
the  history  of  the  species,  it  is  the  property  in  slaves.  If  there  be  any 
property  which  is  founded  in  principles  of  universal  operation,  it  is  the 
property  in  slaves.  To  say  of  an  institution,  whose  history  is  thus 
the  history  of  man,  which  has  always  and  everywhere  existed,  that 
it  is  a  local  and  municipal  relation,  is  of  '  all  absurdities  the  motliest, 
the  merest  word  that  ever  fooled  the  ear  from  out  the  schoolman's  jar 
gon.'  Mankind  may  have  been  wrong — that  is  not  the  question.  The 
point  is,  whether  the  law  made  slavery — whether  it  is  the  police  regu 
lation  of  limited  localities,  or  whether  it  is  a  property  founded  in  natural 
causes,  and  causes  of  universal  operation.  We  say  nothing  as  to  the 
moral  character  of  the  causes.  We  insist  only  upon  the  fact  that  slavery 
is  rooted  in  a  common  law,  wider  and  more  pervading  than  the  com 
mon  law  of  England — THE  UNIVERSAL  CUSTOM  OP  MANKIND."  [The 
capitals  are  the  author's.] — Southern  Presbyterian  Review,  Jan.,  1861. 


AUTHORITIES    FOE    THESE    POSITIONS.  457 

ADDRESS  OF  THE  "  GENERAL  ASSEMBLY  of  the  Confederate  States," 
penned  by  Dr.  THORNWELL:  "Whatever  is  universal  is  natural.  We 
are  willing  that  slavery  should  be  tried  by  this  standard.  AVe  are 
willing  to  abide  by  the  testimony  of  the  race,  and  if  man  as  man  has 
everywhere  condemned  it.  if  all  human  laws  have  prohibited  it  as  crime, 
if  it  stands  in  the  same  category  with  malice,  murder,  and  theft,  then 
we  are  willing,  in  the  name  of  humanity,  to  renounce  it,  and  to  renounce 
it  forever.  But  what  if  the  overwhelming  majority  of  mankind  have 
approved  it;  what  if  philosophers  and  statesmen  have  justified  it,  and  the 
laws  of  all  nations  acknowledged  it,"  &c.? — Address,  &c.  "to  all  the 
Churches  throughout  the  Earth"  Dec.,  1861.  • 

An  ANONYMOUS  writer  in  the  Southern  Presbyterian  Review,  for  April, 
1861 :  "  We  shall  endeavor  to  give  a  succinct  description,  rather  than  a 
formal  definition,  of  the  system  as  actually  existing  at  the  South. 
Slavery,  then,  is  a  constitution  of  the  Law  of  Nature  and  of  nations,  by 
which,  under  certain  providential  conditions,  one  man  has  a  right  to 
incorporate  into  his  family  institution,  and  to  hold  under  his  rule,  as  the 
head  of  the  house,  a  class  of  persons  of  a  different,  and,  in  all  the  attri 
butes  which  fit  men  for  self-government,  an  inferior  race;  and  to  exact 
from  them,  while  in  health  and  vigor,  service  and  labor  suited  to  their 
strength  and  capacity." 

REV.  SAMUEL  SKABURY,  D.  D.,  of  New  York :  "  I  call  it  American  slavery. 
*  *  *  It  is  this  limited  form  of  slavery  which  I  propose  to  defend; 
not  by  an  appeal  to  local  or  positive  law,  whether  State  or  Federal,  but 
by  an  appeal  to  the  Law  of  Nature,  or  the  principles  of  universal  jus 
tice.  *  *  *  Where  is  the  nation  that  has  pronounced  a  state  of 
servitude  for  life  contrary  to  natural  justice  ?  What  age,  before  our 
own,  could  point  to  moralists  that  proclaim  it  an  offence  against  nature 
to  hold  slaves  in  the  condition  in  which  Providence  has  placed  them  ?" 
American  Slavery  Justified  by  the  Law  of  Nature.  1861. 

THE  TRUE  PRESBYTERIAN,  Louisville,  Kentucky :  "  In  every  country 
and  in  every  age  slavery  has  existed,  precisely  as  civil  government  and 
the  family  have  existed.  *  *  *  The  most  polished  and  enlightened 
nations  have  recognized  this  relation.  The  Persians,  the  Greeks,  the 
Romans,  the  Gauls,  the  Saxons,  and  the  Normans,  all  held  slaves,  and 
they  held  them  without  any  more  doubt  of  their  right  to  do  so,  than  of 
their  right  to  establish  civil  government,  or  to  marry,  or  to  rule  their 
children.  The  greatest  legislators  and  philosophers  of  antiquity,  Solon 
and  Lycurgus.  Socrates,  Plato,  and  Aristotle,  all  approved  and  regulated 


458  MODERN   SOUTHERN   VIEWS    OF   SLAVERY. 

the  institution.  These  master  minds  of  the  ancient  world,  reasoning 
upon  the  principles  of  human  nature,  discern  this  as  one  of  the  lawful 
relations  of  mankind." — Review  of  Prof.  Morse. 

Similar  quotations  relating  to  the  first  position  might  be 
given  at  much  greater  length,  and  from  many  other  recent 
writers.  We  give  a  sample  of  the  doctrine  which  covers 
the  second  position. 

II.  As  related  to  Divine  Revelation. 

DR.  THORNWELL  :  "  That  the  relation  betwixt  the  slave  and  his  mas 
ter  is  not  inconsistent  with  the  word  of  God,  we  have  long  since  settled. 
Our  consciences  are  not  troubled,  and  have  no  reason  to  be  troubled,  on 
this  score.  "We  do  not  hold  our  slaves  in  bondage  from  remorseless 
considerations  of  interest.  If  I  know  the  character  of  our  people,  I 
think  I  can  safely  say,  that  if  they  were  persuaded  of  the  essential  im 
morality  of  slavery,  they  would  not  be  backward  in  adopting  measures 
for  the  ultimate  abatement  of  the  evil.  We  cherish  the  institution,  not 
from  avarice,  but  from  principle" — Fast-Day  Sermon,  Columbia,  S.  (7., 
Nov.  21,  1860. 

Again :  "Is  it  to  be  asked  of  us  to  renounce  the  doctrines  which  we 
believe  have  come  down  to  us  from  the  earliest  ages,  and  have  the 
sanction  of  the  oracles  of  God?  Must  we  give  up  what  we  con 
scientiously  believe  to  be  the  truth?  The  thing  is  absurd." — So. 
Pres.  Review,  Jan.,  1861. 

ADDRESS  OF  THE  "GENERAL  ASSEMBLY  of  the  Confederate  States," 
penned  by  Dr.  THORNWELL  :  "  Slavery  is  no  new  thing.  It  has  not  only 
existed  for  ages  in  the  world,  but  it  has  existed  under  every  dispensation 
of  the  covenant  of  grace  in  the  Church  of  God.  Indeed,  the  first  organi 
zation  of  the  Church  as  a  visible  society,  separate  and  distinct  from  the 
unbelieving  world,  was  inaugurated  in  the  family  of  a  slaveholder.  Among 
the  very  persons  to  whom  the  seal  of  circumcision  was  affixed,  were  the 
slaves  of  the  father  of  the  faithful — some  born  in  his  house,  and  others 
bought  with  his  money.  Slavery  again,  then,  reappears  under  the  law. 
God  sanctions  it  in  both  tables  of  the  Decalogue,  and  Moses  treats  it  as 
an  institution  to  be  regulated,  not  abolished ;  legitimated,  and  not  con 
demned.  We  come  down  to  the  age  of  the  New  Testament,  and  we 
find  it  again  in  the  Churches  founded  by  the  Apostles  under  the  pie- 


AUTHORITIES   FOR   THESE    POSITIONS.  459 

nary  inspiration  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  *  *  *  Moses  surely  made  it  the 
subject  of  express  and  positive  legislation,  and  the  Apostles  are  equally 
explicit  in  inculcating  the  duties  which  sprung  from  both  sides  of  the 
relation.  *  *  *  Moses  and  the  Apostles  alike  sanctioned  the  relation 
of  slavery.  *  *  *  We  cannot  prosecute  the  argument  in  detail,  but 
we  have  said  enough,  we  think,  to  vindicate  the  position  of  the  Southern 
Church.  We  have  assumed  no  new  attitude.  We  stand  exactly  where 
the  Church  of  God  has  always  stood,  from  Abraham  to  Moses,  from 
Moses  to  Christ,  from  Christ  to  the  Reformers,  and  from  the  Ke- 
formers  to  ourselves.  *  *  *  The  general  operation  of  the  system 
is  kindly  and  benevolent ;  it  is  a  real  and  effective  discipline,  and  with 
out  it  we  are  profoundly  persuaded  that  the  African  race  in  the  midst 
of  us  can  never  be  elevated  in  the  scale  of  being.  As  long  as  that 
race,  in  its  comparative  degradation,  co-exists  side  by  side  with  the 
white,  bondage  is  its  normal  condition." — Address,  &c.,  Dec.,  1861. 

The  ANONYMOUS  writer  above  quoted  gives  a  specimen  of  the  position 
taken  and  the  argument  for  slavery  propagandism  into  the  Free  States : 
"  There  is  nothing  in  the  nature  of  slavery  to  restrain  its  movements, 
any  more  than  the  possession  of  flocks  and  herds.  So,  when  the 
patriarch  Abraham  emigrated  to  the  new  territory  which  God  had 
given,  he  took  with  him  not  only  his  cattle  but  his  servants,  born  in 
his  house  and  bought  with  his  money.  If,  therefore,  there  is  nothing 
in  the  nature  of  slavery  to  restrain  him,  the  Southern  man  demands : 
What  sovereignty  under  heaven  prevents  him  from  emigrating,  as 
Abraham  did,  with  all  his  household  and  all  his  wealth,  to  the  land 
which  the  Lord  has  given  him,  as  tenant  in  common  with  his  Northern 
and  Western  neighbors?" — So.  Pres.  Review,  April,  1861. 

PROP.  SAMUEL  F.  B.  MORSE,  of  New  York :  "  Man,  from  his  very 
nature,  dislikes  restraints  ;  he  would  at  all  hazards  have  his  own  way, 
and  hence  it  is  that  no  appeal  takes  a  deeper  hold  of  his  passions  and 
instincts  than  an  appeal  to  his  love  of  freedom.  It  was  the  original 
bait  of  the  Tempter  which  lured  man  to  his  ruin.  He  did  not  compre 
hend  that  slavery  to  God  was  man's  highest  freedom.  How  shall  such 
a  nature,  set  on  fire  by  a  word  that  kindles  at  once  all  its  fierceness,  be 
curbed  and  repressed  within  the  bounds  of  reason  ?" 

The  Professor  answers  his  question  by  giving  us  his  view  of  "the 
social  system  which  God  has  ordained."  It  has  in  it  these  four  relations  : 
the  civil,  or  that  between  ruler  and  ruled;  the  connubial,  or  that 
between  husband  and  wife ;  the  parental,  or  that  between  parent  and 
child ;  and  the  servile,  or  that  between  master  and  slave.  He  declares 


460  MODERN    SOUTHERN    VIEWS    OF    SLAVERY. 

that  all  these  are  "  ordained"  and  made  equally  authoritative  by  God,  and 
the  principles  which  govern  them  are  alike  found  in  the  Scriptures. 
Again,  after  speaking  of  the  anti  slavery  views  of  some,  as  the  "setting 
forth  of  a  religious  belief,"  he  inquires:  "And  what  is  the  opposite 
tenet,  declaring  slavery  to  be  an  ordinance  of  God,  but  the  declaration  of 
a  religious  belief?" 

In  commenting  upon  the  views  of  Prof.  DAVID  CHRISTY,  of  Cincin 
nati, — who  has  collected  the  statistics  showing  the  large  numbers 
evangelized  in  Southern  slavery,  as  compared  with  converts  to  Chris 
tianity  on  heathen  ground,  among  many  heathen  nations,  particularizing 
the  poor  success  of  missions  in  Liberia  among  the  free  blacks, — Prof. 
MORSE  says  :  "These  are  stubborn  facts,  confirmed  by  careful,  laborious, 
dispassionate  research;"  and  then,  from  these  facts,  combating  the 
position  that  slavery  is  incompatible  with  the  principles  of  Christianity, 
says :  "  Experience  shows  that  the  converse  of  this  dogma,  as  a  general 
rule,  is  the  truth.  Christianity  has  been  most  successfully  propagated 
among  a  barbarous  race,  where  they  have  been  enslaved  to  a  Christian 
race." — Argument  on  the  Ethical  position  of  Slavery  in  the  Social  System, 
&c. 

REV.  STUART  ROBINSON,  D.  D.,  Editor  of  the  True  Presbyterian,  in  an 
elaborate  article,  entitled,  "  Slavery  recognized  as  a  proper  Social  Order 
in  the  Church  of  God  during  every  Era  of  Inspiration,"  introductory  to 
his  own  doctrines,  speaks  of  the  opposite  sentiments  as  "an  apostasy 
from  the  truth  of  Christ,"  and  as  the  "Iscariot  treason  of  the  artful 
demagogues  who  are  manoeuvring  to  force  gradually  upon  the  Churches 
and  the  conscientious  people  of  the  Border  States,  the  antislavery 
heresies ;"  and  of  the  persons  who  oppose  them  as  those  who  "  blas 
pheme  God,"  and  as  "apostates,  leading  the  Church  to  apostasy."  The 
foregoing  italics  are  those  of  the  article.  The  positions  then  taken  and 
the  passages  of  Scripture  quoted  are  those  usually  referred  to  con 
cerning  servitude  in  the  time  of  Abraham  and  Moses :  as  that  the 
Church  was  originally  established  by  the  covenant  with  Abraham,  "  a 
slaveholder,"  "the  man  called  of  God  to  be  the  father  of  the  visible 
Church  on  earth  ;"  that  "a  slaveholder  and  his  slaves  were  expressly 
made  the  constituent  members  of  the  holy  society ;"  that  "no  one  who 
receives  the  Scriptures  as  of  Divine  authority,  can  deny  that  here  is  the 
highest  form  of  sanction  of  the  principle  of  property  in  man,  at  least  under 
the  patriarchal  dispensation  :"  that  the  same  system  continued  in  the 
"  Church  Mosaic,"  where  "  slavery  is  again  recognized  as  existing  in  the 
Church  by  command  (the  Decalogue),  in  reference  to  man-servants  and 


AUTHORITIES    FOR    THESE    POSITIONS.  461 

maid-servants;"  and  that  "both  in  the  holy  ordinance  of  the  Passover, 
and  in  the  holy  law  given  to  the  Church,  slavery  is  recognized  and  not 
excluded  from  the  Church."  Then,  more  especially  of  the  system  under 
Jie  Mosaic  code:  "Such  was  the  law  of  the  Church,  as  a  Church. 
Around  this  Church,  as  we  have  said,  it  was  part  of  the  mission  of 
Moses  to  erect,  as  a  protecting  shell,  a  constitutional  civil  government, 
till,  in  fulness  of  time,  the  Church  of  one  nation  became  the  Church 
of  all  nations.  Now,  in  that  civil  code,  Divinely  inspired,  and  under 
which  Jehovah  condescended  to  rule  as  political  head  of  the  nation, 
there  could,  of  course,  be  no  statutes  in  principle  contrary  to  righteous 
ness.  Yet  the  civil  code  of  Moses  permitted  and  regulated  slavery,  in 
the  mam  recognizing  the  same  principles  of  the  modern  slave  codes  of  the 
Southern  States."  Having  stated  what  u  modern  antislavery  falsely 
represents  to  be  the  Mosaic  slave  code,"  he  continues:  "But  nothing 
can  be  more  explicit  than  the  provisions  of  this  code,  for  a  system  of 
hereditary  and  perpetual  slavery,  expressly  distinguished  again  and 
again,  from  this  temporary  service  as  hirelings,  or  until  the  year  of 
jubilee.  Two  statutes  expressly  allow  slaves  to  be  bought  of  surround 
ing  heathen  nations,  and  slaves  to  be  made  by  capture  in  war  from  any 
heathen  nations,  except  the  seven  nations  of  Canaan,  who  were  to  be 
utterly  exterminated."  It  is  then  added,  "  that  slavery  entered  into 
every  department  of  the  Hebrew  social  system  by  Divine  sanction  and 
example;'  and,  finally,  the  comforting  conclusion  is  reached,  that  those 
tvho  take  the  position  against  which  the  writer  is  mainly  arguing,  "  must 
either  trifle  with  the  interpretation  of  Scripture  or  blaspheme  the  God 
of  Israel." 

Concerning  slavery  under  the  New  Testament  economy,  Dr.  Robinson 
thus  discourseth:  That  "Jesus  Christ,  at  His  advent,  found  slavery 
existing,  not  only  by  the  Mosaic  law,  but  as  part  of  every  social  struc 
ture  in  the  civilized  world;"  that  "He  did  not  either  expressly  or  im- 
pliedly  exclude  slavery  from  the  Church;"  and  that  ''the  propriety  of 
slavery  under  the  New  Testament  rests  upon  the  sovereign  will  of 
Christ  in  not  only  allowing  it  in  the  patriarchal  and  Mosaic  Churches, 
but  in  permitting  it  to  continue  in  the  New  Testament  Church,  not  re 
pealing  the  law  of  usage  existing,  as  we  have  seen,  from  the  foundation 
of  the  visible  Church.  That  this  is  the  true  view  of  the  matter,  will  be 
more  evident  if  we  examine  the  practice  and  teaching  of  His  Apostles, 
under  the  reorganized  Church,  after  the  outpouring  of  the  Spirit.  In 
every  community  out  of  which  Christian  Churches  were  gathered,  sla 
very  notoriously  existed.  Into  the  New  Testament  Churches,  as  into 


462  MODERN    SOUTHERN    VIEWS    OF    SLAVERY. 

the  Abraharmc  and  Mosaic,  slaveholders  and  their  slaves  were  admitted 
as  constituent  elements  thereof.  While  care  was  taken  to  instruct  the 
Churches  that  the  ceremonial  law  of  Moses  had  expired  by  limitation, 
not  a  word  is  said  of  a  repeal  of  the  right  of  property  in  man.  *  *  * 
The  duties  of  the  relation  of  master  and  servant  are  discussed  in  com 
mon  with  the  duties  of  parent  and  child,  husband  and  wife."  Com 
menting  on  Prof.  Morse's  work,  referred  to  above,  the  True  Presbyterian 
says:  "Thus  these  four  great  relations  of  human  life  (the  civil,  matri 
monial,  parental,  and  servile)  stand  side  by  side,  equally  approved  of  God, 
and  equally  rightful  among  men.  *  *  *  The  Saviour  Himself,  who 
corrected  whatever  else  was  wrong  in  man ;  apostles,  saints,  divines, 
martyrs,  synods,  councils,  philosophers,  statesmen,  moralists ;  all  accepted 
slavery  as  being  equally  of  God  with  civil  government,  marriage,  or  the 
parental  relation." 

REV.  FREDERICK  A.  Ross,  D.  D.,  of  Huntsville,  Alabama,  says  that 
"Slavery  is  of  God;"  of  the  relation  of  "master  and  slave,"  that  "it  is 
a  relation  belonging  to  the  same  category  as  those  of  husband  and  wife, 
parent  and  child;"  and  the  work  in  which  these  doctrines  are  set  forth 
at  length  and  elaborated,  is  entitled,  " Slavery  Ordained  of  God"  Of 
himself,  he  says:  "I  am  not  a  slaveholder.  Nay,  I  have  shown  some 
self-denial  in  this  matter.  I  emancipated  slaves  whose  money  value 
would  now  be  $40,000."  This  was  some  years  ago.  He  states  the 
reason  of  referring  to  this :  "  I  merely  wish  to  show,  that  I  have  no 
selfish  motive  in  giving  the  true  Southern  defence  of  slavery."  It  is  but 
justice  to  Dr.  Ross  to  say,  whether  it  roveals  any  inconsistency  in  his 
argument  or  not,  that  he  is  not  a  perpetualist.  In  addition  to  his  own 
example  to  show  this,  he  addresses  "  the  Southern  man  of  every  grade" 
thus:  "Let  him  know  that  slavery  is  to  pass  away  in  the  fulness  of 
Providence.  Let  the  South  believe  this,  and  prepare  to  obey  the  hand 
that  moves  their  destiny."  Rather  prophetic  as  well  as  didactic.  Nor 
was  Dr.  Ross  opposed  to  "the  agitation,"  as  many  Southern  men  were, 
which  he  would  perhaps  say  has  brought  on  this  "  fulness"  of  time ; 
but  he  rejoices  in  it,  in  this  wise:  "I  believe  He  will  bless  the  world 
in  the  working  out  of  this  slavery.  I  rejoice  then  in  the  agitation  which 
has  so  resulted,  and  will  so  terminate,  to  reveal  the  Bible  and  bless 
mankind."  As  Dr.  Ross's  book  was  published  in  1857,  "the  agitation" 
he  "rejoiced"  in  is  that  which  other  Southern  men  lamented,  and  for 
which  they  threatened.  • 

GENERAL  THOMAS  R.  R.  COBB.  OF  GEORGIA:  "One  of  the  inmates  of 


AUTHORITIES   FOR   THESE   POSITIONS.  463 

the  ark  became  a  '  servant  of  servants ;'  and  in  the  opinion  of  many, 
the  curse  of  Ham  is  now  being  executed  upon  his  descendants,  in  the 
enslavement  of  the  negro  race." — Historical  Sketch  of  Slavery,  1858. 

Again,  GENERAL  COBB  says:  " They  (Christ  and  the  Apostles)  simply 
treated  slavery  as  they  did  all  other  civil  government,  as  of  God,  so 
long  as  in  His  providence  He  permitted  it  to  exist ;  and  regulated,  by 
precepts,  the  relation,  as  they  did  that  of  ruler  and  subject." — Law  of 
Ntgro  Slavery,  1858. 

Again,  GENERAL  COBB  says :  "  The  test,  then,  is,  does  the  institution 
of  negro  slavery  tend  to  promote  the  physical,  intellectual,  and  moral 
growth  of  the  negro  race  ?"  He  answers  this  question  in  the  affirma 
tive,  and  in  another  place,  adds:  "The  inference  would  seem  irresisti 
ble,  that  the  most  successful  engine  for  the  development  of  negro 
intellect  is  slavery." — Law  of  Negro  Slavery,  1858. 

KEY.  THOMAS  SMYTH,  D.  D.,  of  Charleston,  S.  C.,  says :  "  The  war 
now  carried  on  by  the  North  is  a  war  against  slavery,  and  is,  there 
fore,  treasonable  rebellion  against  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States, 
and  against  the  word,  providence,  and  government  of  God.  *  *  * 
Slavery,  as  a  form  of  organized  involuntary  labor,  has  always  and  every 
where  existed  among  the  negro  race.  *  *  *  What  if  God  made 
slavery  a  part  of  man's  and  woman's  original  curse  ;  what  if  God 
ordained,  as  a  part  of  that  penalty,  that  the  earth  should  be  brought 
into  universal  cultivation  by  a  universally  diffused  race,  through  slavery 
in  some  form  of  involuntary  servitude ;  what  if  God,  by  a  positive, 
divine  enactment,  ordained  that,  through  the  history  of  the  world? 
slavery  should  exist  as  a  form  of  organized  labor  among  certain  races 
of  men,  and  that  lordship  over  such  slaves  should  be  a  part  of  the 
perpetual  blessing  of  the  races  of  Shem  and  Japheth;  what  if  God  has 
actually  embodied  slavery  in  His  moral  law,  and  by  there  guarding, 
and  protecting,  and  regulating  it,  has  made  it  appertain  to  the  present 
condition  of  humanity ;  what  if  He  ordained  and  regulated  it  under  the 
patriarchal,  Mosaic,  prophetical,  and  Christian  dispensations ;  what  if 
in  the  New  Testament  a  curse  is  pronounced  against  fanatical  opposi 
tion  to  slavery  as  autichristian,  and  a  sentence  of  withdrawal  from 
such  as  heretical,  both  in  Church  and  State ;  what  if,  in  these  and 
other  ways,  God  claims  slavery,  like  other  forms  of  government  adapted 
to  sinful  human  nature,  as  His  own  ordinance  for  good;  what,  then, 
must  be  thought  of  this  war  of  the  North  against  slavery,  and  this  war 
of  the  South  in  its  defence,  as  inwoven  by  Providence  into  the  very 
texture  of  its  body  politic?" — So.  Prcs.  Review,  April,  18G3. 


464  ^.lODEEX    SOUTHEEX    VIEWS    OF    SLAVERY. 


DR.  SEABURY,  defending  "  American  slavery  r.s  justified  by  the  Law 
of  Nature"  (1861),  thinks  it  might  have  existed,  so  far  as  the  character 
of  slavery  is  concerned,  "in  Paradise."  He  has  a  chapter  on  the 
"  Theory  of  Slavery,"  in  which  he  says:  "  But  what  (methinks  I  hear 
the  reader  exclaim),  do  you  think  there  could  have  been  bondage  in 
Paradise  ?  Pray,  why  not?"  —  "I  see  no  reason,  then,  why  the  relation 
of  master  and  servant  should  not  have  existed  in  a  state  of  innocence, 
as  well  as  that  of  husband  and  wife,  parent  and  child."  —  "  All  this,  I 
confess,  proceeds  on  the  assumption  that  slavery,  or  servitude  for  life, 
does  no  violence  to  Nature,  but  is  good  and  agreeable  to  Nature." 

The  True  Presbyterian  warmly  commends  Dr.  Seabury's  book,  in  suc 
cessive  numbers  of  the  paper,  and  says:  "He  argues  that  in  this  view 
of  it,  slavery  being  a  condition  so  closely  allied  to  that  in  which  our 
wives,  our  sons,  and  our  daughters  are  placed,  by  the  laws  of  God  and 
man,  cannot  be  the  degrading  and  hateful  relation  that  modern  aboli 
tionists  declare  it  to  be.  There  is  no  debasement  in  it.  It  might  have 
existed  in  Paradise,  and  may  continue  through  the  Millennium."  The 
"  Millennium"  phase  is  probably  an  advance  movement  on  the  part 
of  the  True  Presbyterian,  which  Dr.  Seabury  may  not  yet  have  reached. 
At  least,  we  have  not  yet  discovered  it  in  his  book.  But  if  slavery 
could  have  existed  in  "  Paradise,"  we  see  no  reason  why  it  may  not  be 
continued  in  the  "Millennium;"  and  we  expect  soon  to  see  its  modern 
defenders  carrying  it  into  Heaven,  and  perpetuating  it  forever.  This 
we  are  prepared  for  by  the  following  from  the  True  Presbyterian,  which 
shows  how  deeply  and  tenderly  the  system  of  Southern  negro  slavery 
has  entwined  itself  among  its  Christian  affections:  "It  is  certainly 
remarkable  that  the  Scriptures  employ  this  very  relation  to  express  our 
subjection  to  Christ.  Believers  are  constantly  called  the  slaves  of  Christ  : 
all  bondage  then  is  not  disgraceful  ;  here  is  an  instance  in  which  slavery 
is  sweet  and  honorable.  And  if  it  be  not  degrading  to  our  wives  to  obey 
their  husbands,  and  to  our  children  to  obey  their  parents,  we  cannot 
see  why  it  should  degrade  a  slave  to  obey  his  master."  —  "  The  slaves  of 
Jesus  Christ  love  and  revere  their  Divine  Master,  and  rejoice  in  their 
bondage;  and  so  may  a  slave  love  and  revere  his  human  master,  and 
delight  in  his  service." 

We  always  supposed  that  the  Apostle  Paul  understood  the  case,  when 
he  called  a  Christian,  "the  Lord's  freeman"  (1  Cor.  vii.  22),  but  the 
Apostle  who  presides  over  the  True  Presbyterian,  to  instruct  Kentucky 
Christians,  is  wiser  than  Paul;  the  Christian  is,  after  all,  but  "the 
Lord's  slave."  Our  Saviour  said  of  His  people  :  "  Ye  shall  know  the 


AUTHORITIES    FOR    THESE    POSITIONS.  465 

truth,  and  the  truth  shall  make  you  free.  If  the  ^on  therefore 
shall  make  you  free,  ye  shall-  be  free  indeed."  But  this  mod 
ern  Apostle  is  wiser  than  Christ.  All  Christians  are  "  the  slaves 
of  Jesus  Christ;"  and  the  negro  slavery  of  the  South  is  the  type  of 
the  "  bondage"  in  which  they  are  to  "rejoice"  forevermore I  But 
our  object  litre  is  not  to  argue  upon,  but  merely  to  state,  the  positions 
of  the  modern  defenders  of  negro  slavery.  Every  one  of  course  knows 
that  the  original  Greek  word  (doulos)  is  applied  to  the  servant  of  Christ ; 
but  to  argue  from  this,  that  every  Christian  is  the  slave  of  Christ,  in  the 
sense  that  the  Southern  negro  is  the  slave  of  his  master  under  Southern 
law,  is  about  as  good  logic  as  some  of  these  writers  usually  exhibit ;  and 
yet,  this  is  the  whole  case,  so  far  as  the  application  of  a  common  term 
to  things  totally  distinct  is  concerned. 

We  have  another  witness  to  the  Millennial  phase  of  the  case.  REV. 
JOSEPH  R.  WILSONT,  D.  D.,  of  Augusta,  Georgia,  preached  a  dis 
course  to  his  congregation  in  that  city,  Jan.  6,  1861,  on  the  "Mutual 
Relation  of  Masters  and  Servants  as  taught  in  the  Bible,"  the  closing 
words  of  which  are  as  follows :  "  And,  oh,  when  that  welcome  day 
shall  dawn,  whose  light  will  reveal  a  world  covered  with  righteousness , 
not  the  least  pleasing  sight  will  be  the  institution  of  domestic  slavery, 
freed  from  its  stupid  servility  on  the  one  side  and  its  excesses  of  neglect 
or  severity  on  the  other,  and  appearing  to  all  mankind  as  containing 
that  scheme  of  politics  and  morals,  which,  by  saving  a  lower  race  from 
the  destruction  of  heathenism,  has,  under  Divine  management,  con 
tributed  to  refine,  exalt,  and  enrich  its  superior  race!" 

REV.  GEORGE  D.  ARMSTRONG,  D.  D.,  Norfolk,  Virginia:  ""With  civil 
government,  marriage,  the  family,  and  slavery,  they  (the  Apostles)  dealt 
in  the  same  way."  "The  Church  must  labor  to  make  good  masters  and 
good  slaves,  just  as  she  labors  to  make  good  husbands,  good  wives, 
good  parents,  good  children,  good  rulers,  good  subjects."  "  The  laws 
of  our  slaveholding  States,  at  the  present  time,  ignore  the  marriage  rela 
tion  among  slaves.  *  *  *  The  law  in  our  slaveholding  States,  at  the 
present  day,  gives  to  the  master  the  right  to  separate  finally  husband  and 
wife  among  his  slaves,  and  this  at  his  pleasure  and  for  his  own  profit.1'* — 
Christian  Doctrine  of  Slav  try,  1857. 

*  At  this  point,  Dr.  Armstrong  introduces  a  long  note  from  Fle.tch.er1  s  Studies  on 
Slavery,  which  he  regards  as  "  the  most  elaborate  work  on  slavery  which  has  been 
published  at  the  South."  He  quotes  Fletcher  as  saying:  "  So  far  as  our  experience 
goes  [Mr.  Fletcher  possibly  means  "observation"'  instead  of  "  experience,1'  and  pon- 
Kibly  not],  masters  universally  manifest  a  desire  to  have  their  negroes  marry,  and 
to  live  with  their  wives  and  children  according  to  Christian  rules."1  Now,  if  this 


466  MODERN   SOUTHERN    VIEWS    OF   SLAVERY. 

RIGHT  REVEREND  JOHN  HENRY  HOPKINS,  D.  D.,  Bishop  of  the  Prot 
estant  Episcopal  Church  in  Vermont:  "The  slavery  of  the  negro  race, 
a*  maintained  in  the  Southern  Stales,  appears  to  me  fully  authorized, 
both  in  the  Old  and  New  Testaments,  which,  as  the  written  Word  of 
God,  afford  the  only  infallible  standard  of  moral  rights  and  obligations/' 
Again,  in  another  place:  "The  difference  between  the  power  of  the 
Northern  parent  and  the  Southern  slaveholder,  is  reduced  to  this, 
namely,  that  the  master  has  u  property  in  the  labor  of  his  slave  for  life, 
instead  of  having  it  only  to  the  age  of  twenty-one." 

The  Bishop,  takes  the  positions  and  relies  on  the  arguments  so  fully 
given  in  our  quotations  from  others.  He  further  says :  "  We  have 
heard  the  boasted  determination  that  the  Union  shall  never  be  restored, 
until  its  provision  for  the  protection  of  slavery  is  utterly  abolished. 
And  what  is  the  result  of  all  this  philanthropy  ?  The  fearful  judgment 
of  God  has  descended  to  chastise  these  multiplied  acts  of  rebellion 
against  His  divine  Government."  "  If  ever  the  Union  of  the  States  is 
re-established,  it  can  only  be,  in  my  humble  judgment,  by  a  return  to 
the  old  and  Scriptural  doctrine,  once  held  alike  by  the  whole  Christian 
community,  that  slavery,  in  itself,  involves  no  sin." — View  of  Slavery, 
rcpublished  by  the  Author  in  1864 . 

ALBERT  TAYLOR  BLEDSOE,  LL.  D.,  Professor  of  Mathematics  in  the 
University  of  Virginia:  "The  institution  of  slavery,  as  it  exists  among 
us  at  the  South,  is  founded  in  political  justice,  is  in  accordance  with  the 
will  of  God  and  the  designs  of  His  providence,  and  is  conducive  to  the 
highest,  purest,  and  best  interests  of  mankind." — Liberty  and  Slavery, 
1860. 

REV.  NEUEMIAH  AIU.MS,  D.  D.,  of  Boston,  among  other  apologetics 

is  so,  one  of  two  things  must  follow :  either,  Mr.  Fletcher's  knowledge  of  this 
"desire"  is  very  limited;  or,  it  is  a  mistake  to  suppose  this  "desire''  is  very  prev 
alent,  as  his  Ungupge  would  seem  to  imply.  But  granting  that  he  is  correct,  the 
"desire"  is  wholly  inoperative.  This  is  shown  in  the  simple  fact  that  the  laws 
which  "  ignore  MU-  marriage  relation  among  slaves,"  remain  the  same  on  this  point 
from  generation  to  generation.  Can  any  thing  demonstrate  the  purely  venal  and 
mercenary  spirit  of  that  system  of  "Christian  slavery"  which  Dr.  Armstrong 
deiVnds,  more  conclusively  than  this  ?  Mr.  Fletcher  gives  a  good  many  economical 
and  <*ome  domestic  reasons  why  "  masters"  should  "manifest"  such  "desire."  But 
if  it  is  "  universal"  among  slaveholders,  why  don't  these  "masters"  (for  they  rule 
in  Southern  politics)  ••  manifest'1  that  "desire"  in  thejr  Legislatures,  and  have  their 
laws  changed?  What  but  the  mercenary  spirit  of  the  whole  system  prevents  this 
"universal  desire''  from  taking  form  in  law,  so  that  "final  separation"  could  never 
occur?  That  any  such  -  desire'1  exists  "  universally,"  will  do  to  tell  to  tJio  marines. 


RESPONSIBILITY    OF   THE    CHURCH.  467 

for  the  negro  slavery  of  the  South,  says:  "The  Gospel  is  to  slavery 
what  the  growing  of  clover  is  to  sorrel.  Religion  in  the  masters  de 
stroys  every  thing  in  slavery  which  makes  it  obnoxious  ;  and  not  only 
so,  it  converts  the  relation  of  the  slave  into  an  effectual  means  of  hap 
piness."  If  this  is  so,  one  would  think  there  is  very  little  "growing 
of  clover11  in  the  South.  It  is  rather  strange,  when  Dr.  Adams  was 
penning  his  apologies  for  slavery,  that  he  did  not  think  of  a  principle 
he  elsewhere  notices :  "A  Northerner  at  the  South  soon  perceives,  that, 
if  he  fee^s  and  shows  in  a  proper  manner  a  natural  repugnance  to 
slavery,  they  respect  him  for  it,  while  they  greatly  suspect  and  distrust 
those  from  the  North  who  seem  in  favor  of  the  system."* 

RESPONSIBILITY  OP   THE  CHURCH    FOR   THE  REVOLUTION   IN 
SOUTHERN    OPINION. 

The  reader  may  see,  in  what  we  have  now  given,  that 
the  present  position  of  the  Southern  Church  and  of  its 
Northern  "  allies,1'  is  a  position  of  direct  antagonism  to 
that  maintained  by  substantially  the  whole  country,  North 
and  South,  until  within  a  period  of  some  thirty  years. 
The  Southern  section  of  the  Union,  for  some  years  past, 
has  with  great  unanimity  maintained  these  extreme  views. 
It  is  now  a  very  interesting  inquiry,  What  portion  of 
the  community  took  the  lead,  and  is  therefore  primarily 
responsible,  for  this  ethical  revolution?  Under  whose 
teachings,  at  first,  was  the  general  Southern  mind  brought 
to  abjure  its  former  sentiments,  and  adopt  the  "corner 
stone"  faith  concerning  slavery  ?  Our  own  opinion  is,  that 
THE  CHURCH,  through  its  leading  clergymen,  in  the  pulpit 
md  through  the  press,  led  the  way,  and  that,  for  the  most 
>art,  the  politicians  of  the  South  were  content  to  follow 
•hem.  A  mass  of  testimony  exists  on  this  point.  We 
.'lave  space  for  a  bare  sample  of  it. 

*  When  the  Hon.  Edward  Everett  made  the  first  New  England  speech  in  Con- 
gross  in  defence  of  slavery,  John  Randolph  exclaimed  :  "  I  envy  neither  the  head 
nor  the  heart  of  any  man  from  the  North,  who  can  defend  slavery  on  principle." 

21 


468  MODERN    SOUTHERN    VIEWS    OF    SLAVERY. 

EARLY    POSITION    OF    REV.    JAMES    SMYLIE. 

In  proof  of  the  point  that  the  Church  led  the  State,  in 
the  change  of  views  on  the  merits  of  the  system  of  sla 
very,  may  be  cited  an  article  from  the  New  Orleans  True 
Witness,  a  religious  paper,  edited  by  Rev.  R.  Mclnnis,  a 
Presbyterian  clergyman,  a  native  Mississippian,  who  has 
the  means  of  knowing  whereof  he  affirms.  It  is  under 
date  of  August  18,  1860.  It  may  be  added,  also,  that  the 
Synod  of  Mississippi  officially  declare  the  same  thing 
stated  in  this  article,  as  to  the  leading  responsibility  for 
this  change.  The  editor  remarks  as  follows : 

SMYLIE  ON  SLAVERY. — It  is  an  interesting  historical  fact,  that  Rev. 
James  Smylie,  an  Old  School  Presbyterian  minister,  was  the  first  person 
in  our  country  who  took  boldly  the  position  that  slavery  was  not  inconsistent 
with  the  teachings  of  the  Bible.  He  was  one  of  the  first  Presbyterian 
ministers  who  came  to  the  Southwest,  and  assisted  in  forming  the 
Mississippi  Presbytery,  in  1816.  The  general  view  held  at  this  time, 
and  for  many  years  after,  South  as  well  as  North,  was  that  slavery  was 
an  evil.  The  question  had  not  been  examined.  All  took  it  for  granted 
that  slavery  was  an  evil,  and  inconsistent  with  the  spirit  and  teachings 
of  the  word  of  God.  Hence  the  sentiments  expressed  by  our  Church, 
in  1818 — which,  by  the  way,  have  been  most  shamefully  garbled  and 
misrepresented — were  at  the  time  the  sentiments  of  the  whole  country,  and 
were  regarded  as  a  pretty  strong  Southern  document;  hence  all  the  South 
voted  for  it.  In  fact,  so  strong  was  the  feeling  for  emancipation,  that 
this  act  of  1818  discouraged  it  in  our  members,  where  the  slaves  were 
not  prepared  for  it,  while  it  condemned  the  "harsh  censures  and  un 
charitable  reflection"  of  the  more  ultra  men  of  the  North.  We  have 
referred  to  this  merely  to  call  attention  to  the  fact  that  the  opinion  of  the 
whole  country  was  that  slavery  was  an  evil.  And  we  k  now  of  no  man 
who  took  a  different  position,  until  Rev.  James  Smylie.  in  answer  to  a 
letter  addressed  to  him  as  stated  clerk  of  the  above  Presbytery,  wrote 
a  reply,  in  which  he  attempted  to  show  that  neither  the  Old  nor  the 
New  Testament  Scriptures  declared  slavery  to  be  a  sin,  but  both  recog 
nized  it  as  an  institution  belonging  to  the  great  social  system.  This 
letter,  which  has  long  since  been  published,  in  a  pamphlet  of  some 


PAPER    OF    THE    SYNOD    OF    MISSISSIPPI.  469 

eighty  pages,  small  type,  was  not  only  the  first,  but  it  is,  in  our  view, 
the  ablest  and  most  convincing  Scriptural  argument  ever  published  on 
the  subject.  It  shows  research,  ability,  honesty,  and  is  unanswerable. 
$"hen  the  substance  of  this  letter  was  delivered,  in  1835  and  '36,  in  the 
Churches  of  Mississippi,  in  the  form  of  a  sermon,  the  people  generally, 
large  slaveholders  too,  did  not  sympathize  with  him  in  his  views.  "We 
recollect  hearing  him,  on  one  occasion,  for  some  three  hours,  and  every 
person,  without  exception,  thought  him  somewhat  fanatical.  The  idea 
that  the  Bible  did  sanction  slavery  was  regarded  as  a  new  doctrine  even  in 
Mississippi.  Yet  Rev.  James  Smylie — and  a  more  honest  man  never 
lived — was  honestly  sincere  in  his  convictions  and  his  views,  and  he  went 
ahead  against  the  tide  of  public  opinion.  His  Scriptural  argument  has 
never  been  answered,  nor  can  it  be.  This  letter  was  the  first  thing  that 
turned  public  attention  in  the  South,  and  especially  in  the  Southwest,  to  the 
investigation  of  the  subject;  and  every  Scriptural  argument  we  have  seen 
is  but  a  reproduction  of  this,  while  none  is  so  clear,  full,  and  unanswer 
able.  It  ought  to  be  republished. 

SOME  TWO  YEARS  AFTER  the  publication  of  this  letter,  George  Mc- 
Duffie,  a  senator  of  South  Carolina,  announced  similar  views  in  Con 
gress,  and  was  regarded  there  as  taking  a  strange  and  untenable 
position — one  which  met  with  little  sympathy  in  that  body.  The  fact 
is,  the  South  had  never  examined  the  subject,  and  were  finally  driven 
to  it  by  the  intolerant  fanaticism  of  ultra  men  at  the  North. 

We  mention  the  above  facts,  not  for  the  purpose  of  provoking  dis 
cussion,  but  merely  to  show  the  state  of  public  opinion  at  the  time  on 
the  subject  of  slavery ;  and  to  show  that  the  South  is  indebted  to  a 
minister  of  our  Church  for  the  first  clear  and  unanswerable  argument 
against  the  generally  admitted  view  that  slavery  was  a  sin. 

PAPER    OF    THE    SYNOD    OF    MISSISSIPPI. 

It  will  be  seen  from  the  official  document  which  follows, 
that  Mr.  Smylie  began  to  make  public  bis  views  somewhat 
earlier  than  the  time  mentioned  by  Mr.  Mclnnis  ;  at  least, 
before  he  received  the  letter  from  the  Presbytery  of  Chil- 
licothe.  The  following  is  an  extract  from  an  obituary 
notice  of  Rev.  James  Smylie,  of  Mississippi,  which  was 
reported  in  the  Synod  of  which  he  was  a  member,  and  by 
that  body  unanimously  adopted: 


470  MODERN    SOUTHERN   VIEWS    OP   SLAVERY. 

Extract  from  the  Minutes  of  the  Synod  of  Mississippi,  at  a  Meeting  held  in 
the  City  of  Jackson,  Miss.,  in  December,  1853. 

There  is  one  production  from  his  pen  which  produced  a  strong  sensa 
tion  in  various  parts  of  the  United  States.  When  the  abolition  excite 
ment  arose  in  the  North,  he  resolved,  as  many  others  ought  to  have  done, 
to  give  the  Sacred  Scriptures  a  thorough  searching,  to  ascertain  the  doc 
trines  and  duties  there  inculcated  in  relation  to  slavery.  He  determined 
to  investigate  the  subject  in  the  most  candid  manner,  and  to  receive 
whatever  was  taught  with  the  most  fearless  and  implicit  faith.  The 
result  surprised  himself.  He  found  that  the  teachings  of  Scripture  were 
greatly  at  variance  ivith  the  popular  belief,  lie  wished  to  communicate  his 
discoveries  to  others.  He  wrote  a  sermon  on  the  subject  and  preached 
it  at  Port  Gibson.  It  gave  great  offence  not  only  to  the  Church,  but  also  to 
his  brethren  in  the  ministry,  who  seriously  advised  him  to  preach  that  ser 
mon  no  more.  In  the  meantime,  the  Presbytery  of  Chillicothe  (in  Ohio) 
assumed  the  lofty  position  of  instructors  of  their  brethren  of  the  South 
on  the  subject  of  slavery,  exhorting  them  to  abandon  it  as  a  heinous  sin. 
They  addressed  a  letter  to  the  Presbytery  of  Mississippi  on  the  subject. 
This  letter  was  received  by  Mr.  Smylie  as  stated  Clerk.  He  wrote  a 
reply,  to  be  laid  before  the  Presbytery  for  their  adoption.  He  read  this 
reply  to  one  of  his  brethren  before  the  meeting.  As  he  had  entered  into 
the  teachings  of  Scripture  in  relation  to  slavery,  the  reply  was  long ; 
and  many  of  his  views  differed  from  those  of  his  brethren.  On  these 
two  accounts  he  was  told  that  his  reply  would  not,  in  all  probability,  be 
adopted  by  the  Presbytery.  It  was  then  agreed  that  the  brother  whom 
he  had  consulted  should  write  another  reply,  in  a  different  style  and 
manner,  and  more  concise,  and  that  this  should  be  offered  if  his  was  not 
adopted.  The  concise  reply  was  adopted  by  the  Presbytery,  and  the 
Chillicothe  letter  and  the  reply  were  published  together  in  a  religious 
newspaper  at  Cincinnati,  and  there  was  no  further,  annoyance  from  the 
Presbytery  of  Chillicothe.  Mr.  Smylie  then  determined  that  he  would  pub 
lish  his  views  in  a  pamphlet  form.  Such  was  the  variation  of  his  senti 
ments  from  those  of  his  brethren,  that  all  whom  he  consulted,  with  but  one  or  two 
exceptions,  attempted  to  dissuade  him  from  this  step.  With  that  honest 
inflexibility  of  purpose  and  confidence  in  the  correctness  of  his  own  con 
clusions  which  ever  distinguished  the  man,  he  published  his  pamphlet. 
For  a  while  he  was  covered  with  odium,  and  honored  with  a  large 
amount  of  abuse  from  the  abolitionists  of  the  North,  for  teaching  that 
the  Bible  did  not  forbid  the  holding  of  slaves,  and  that  it  was  tolerated 


CONFIRMATORY    TESTIMONY.  471 

in  the  primitive  Church.  These  doctrines  are  now  received  as  true  both 
North  and  South,  and  they  constitute  the  basis  of  action  of  the  most 
respectable  religious  bodies  even  in  the  North  itself;  so  that  Mr.  Smylie 
has  the  high  honor  of  giving  the  true  exposition  of  the  doctrines  of  the 
Bible  in  relation  to  slavery,  in  the  commencement  of  the  Abolition  ex 
citement,  and  of  giving  instruction  to  others  far  more  learned  and  talented 
than  himself. 

JACKSON,  Miss.,  j  (Signed)  J.  H.  VAN  COURT, 

December  17M,  1853.  )  Cfuiirman. 

CONFIRMATORY   TESTIMONY. 

In  Dr.  Baird' s  "  Southern  Rights  and  Northern  Duties," 
before  referred  to,  we  find  incidental  evidence  confirmatory 
of  the  point  that  certain  of  the  Southern  clergy  were  ear 
lier  than  Southern  statesmen  in  announcing  the  new  doc 
trines  on  slavery.  John  C.  Calboun  has  been  deemed, 
along  with  Mr.  McDuffie,  named  above,  one  of  the  earliest 
among  Southern  Statesmen  to  take  extreme  proilavery 
ground.  But  Dr.  Baird  places  him  in  the  rear  of  Mr. 
Smylie,  in  point  of  time.  Speaking  of  the  Anti-Slavery 
Society,  he  says  :  "  This  society  was  but  three  years  old, 
when,  in  1835,  it  acquired  an  illustrious  ally  in  the  business 
of  slavery  agitation  in  the  person  of  Mr.  Calhoun,  who 
then,  as  he  afterward  avowed,  began  to  act  upon  the  policy 
which  ruled  his  subsequent  life." 

Mr.  Smylie  began  the  work  somewhat  earlier.  Nor  is 
it  supposed  that  he  was  impelled  by  any  agitation  at  that  time 
at  the  North.  Even  Dr.  Baird  says  that  "  in  1835,"  "  the 
antislavery  party  was  an  insignificant  faction."  And  from 
that  day  for\vard  it  was  but  a  small  fraction  of  the  people. 
We  have  heard  Mr.  Smylie,  from  his  own  lips,  state  what 
led  him  at  first  to  examine  the  subject  more  fully,  and 
finally  to  repudiate  the  views  then  universal  at  the  South. 
We  were  a  member  of  the  Synod  of  Mississippi,  and  pres 
ent,  when  the  obituary  concerning  him  was  adopted ;  and 
from  our  personal  knowledge,  we  know  it  was  the  common 


472  MODERN    SOUTHERN    VIEWS    OF    SLAVERY. 

belief  among  all  classes  in  the  Church  at  the  South,  that 
he  and  other  clergymen,  chiefly  in  the  Presbyterian  Church, 
were  the  first  to  take  open  and  broad  ground  on  that  plat 
form  which  maintains  the  extreme  proslavery  views, — that 
Slavery  is  a  divine  system,  an  ordinance  of  God,  on  a  par 
with  the  parental  and  matrimonial  relations, — views  which, 
at  length,  in  the  demands  which  were  made  in  their  name, 
plunged  the  country  into  treason,  rebellion,  and  war. 

It  is,  therefore,  no  slander  upon  the  Southern  Church 
and  Southern  Clergy  to  say  that  THEY  LED  THE  WAY  in  the 
revolution  in  Southern  opinion  upon  slavery.  They  claim, 
to  have  done  this ;  they  deem  it  an  honor ;  they  glory  in 
it ;  they  will  not  divide  the  honor  with  politicians  ;  but,  as 
in  regard  to  the  rebellion,  as  we  have  shown  elsewhere, 
they  claim  to  have  led  both  politicians  and  people.  As  a 
suitable  reward  for  this  noble  work,  they  embalm  the 
memory  of  these  who  took  the  lead  in  it,  in  solemn  obitua 
ries  adopted  in  ecclesiastical  bodies;  and  that  these  deeds 
may  not  perish  from  among  men,  they  send  these  memo 
rials  for  sacred  deposit  in  the  Archives  of  the  Presbyterian 
Historical  Society,  that  all  men  to  the  end  of  time  may 
know  wherefore  they  were  thus  highly  honored ! 


PRELIMINARY    CONSIDERATIONS.  473 


CHAPTER  XIII. 

SLAVERY  IN  POLEMICS.— DIVINE  REVELATION. 

IT  seems  almost  to  be  a  work  of  supererogation,  at  the 
^resent  time,  to  argue  for  or  against  Slavery  in  the  United 
States  ;  to  attempt  to  resolve  questions  with  the  pen  which 
are  in  process  of  settlement  by  the  sword,  and  which, 
before  the  ink  we  use  is  dry,  may  be  determined  forever. 
Our  plan,  however,  would  not  be  complete,  unless  we 
should  give  some  attention  to  the  reasonings  by  which  the 
modern  doctrines  upon  slavery  are  defended. 

We  shall  not  endeavor  to  emulate  either  the  eloquence 
or  the  argument  of  those  men  of  Kentucky,  some  of  them 
of  a  former  day,  whose  writings  upon  slavery  we  have 
already  given  ;  nor  do  we  think  the  occasion  calls  for  any 
thing  to  be  said,  or  indeed  that  any  thing  can  be  said, 
against  the  special  character  and  influence  of  the  system, 
beyond  what  they  have  uttered.  Our  argument  will  bear 
chiefly  upon  points  brought  to  view  in  the  literature  of  the 
rebellion,  and  will  aim  to  combat  the  positions  taken  by  its 
instigators  and  abettors. 

PRELIMINARY     CONSIDERATIONS. 

We  have  given,  at  great  length,  in  the  chapter  imme 
diately  preceding,  the  doctrines  announced  by  those  who 
defend  negro  slavery  as  it  exists  in  the  South.  It  will  be 
seen  that  the  two  propositions,  numerically  designated, 
which  we  have  there  laid  down,  are  covered  in  every  par 
ticular,  and  even  more  than  covered,  by  the  authorities  we 
have  cited.  It  will  be  seen,  moreover,  that  every  position 


474  SLAVERY    IX    POLEMICS. 

taken  by  these  authorities,  is  made  to  illustrate,  apply  to, 
and  justify  the  Southern  system  of  negro  slavery.  This  is 
the  specific  and  sole  purpose  for  which  their  works  are 
written  and  their  reasonings  elaborated. 

We  do  not  propose  to  exhaust  the  entire  argument  by 
which  these  extravagant  positions  may  be  met.  That 
would  require  a  volume  instead  of  a  chapter.  So  much 
has  been  written  on  this  whole  subject  already,  by  able 
scholars,  that  it  seems  needless  to  waste  many  words  upon 
it ;  and  yet,  it  will  scarcely  do  to  sny  that  at  this  time  of 
day  these  extraordinary  emanations  are  not  worth  noticing. 
From  the  sources  indicated,  and  by  the  authority  of  great 
names,  they  are  still  spread  before  the  religions  public, 
with  glowing  commendation,  while  those  who  dissent  from 
these  high  priests  of  the  Southern  Oracle  are  freely  called 
by  "  religious"  men  "  apostates,"  "  infidels,"  "  heretics," 
"French  Jacobins,"  and  the  like.  These  authoritative 
responses  have  an  influence  upon  many  minds  who  draw 
their  inspiration  through  the  channels  which  convey  them. 
They  should  be  brought  to  the  test  of  truth.  We  pro 
pose  to  notice  only  a  few  of  the  main  points  made,  and  to 
present  our  reasons  for  dissenting  from  them. 

THE    SCRIPTURES    GROSSLY    LIBELLED. 

As  incidental  to  the  subsequent  argument,  we  notice,  in 
passing,  the  monstrous  assumption  of  Dr.  Robinson,  editor 
of  The  True  Presbyterian,  that  the  servitude  among  the 
Jews,  in  the  time  of  Abraham  and  Moses,  is  the  essentf-j! 
type  of  negro  slavery  in  the  Southern  States,  as  the  systems 
are  judged  by  their  respective  "codes,"  and  by  the  facts. 
He  asserts  this  in  terms,  several  times  over;  :ind  yet,  no 
greater  libel  upon  the  truth  was  ever  put  into  human  lan 
guage. 

Let  the  reader  first  turn  to  the  chapter  where  the  paper 


THE    SCRIPTURES    GROSSLY    LIBELLED.  475 

of  the  Committee  of  the  Kentucky  Synod  sets  forth  the 
character  of  slavery  in  Kentucky,  and  notice  the  points 
made  concerning  the  system,  both  as  to  the  law  and  the 
facts,  and  remember  that  slavery  in  the  Border  States  is 
always  seen  in  its  milder  form  as  compared  with  the  States 
farther  South  ;  and  then  let  him  note  that  it  is  the  system 
as  it  prevails  throughout  the  slave  States,  as  seen  under 
their  u  slave  codes,"  which  Dr.  Robinson  says  is  the 
counterpart  of  that  which  existed  in  the  patriarchal  and 
Mosaic  ages,  and  which  was  sanctioned  by  the  positive 
ordinances  of  God.  Was  ever  a  more  palpable  untruth 
uttered  to  deceive  plain  men  ?  Whether  this  is  so  may 
be  seen  by  comparison.  Our  own  ears  have  been  greeted 
with  the  satisfaction  which  certain  people  have  expressed 
with  their  condition  in  holding  this  relation  under  the 
slave  laws,  from  reading  these  very  words  in  The  True 
Presbyterian,  and  they  have  been  led  to  believe  that  the 
venerated  fathers  of  the  Church  who  held  a  contrary  opin 
ion  were  ignorant  of  God's  word ;  and  we  presume  such 
unscrupulous  dogmatism  has  beguiled  and  consoled  many 
others  in  the  same  manner. 

There  is  no  call  for  mincing  words  in  matters  of  such 
vitul  moment,  where  the  interests  of  the  State,  the  honor 
of  the  Church,  the  truth  of  the  Scriptures,  and  the  personal 
duty  of  men  are  all  concerned;  and  hence  we  call  such 
utterances  by  the  only  word  which  can  properly  charac 
terize  them.  They  are  deliberate  and  positive  libels  upon 
the  word  and  honor  of  God  :  and  this  we  pledge  ourselves 
to  prove.  The  language  in  which  they  are  uttered  by  Dr. 
Robinson  is  as  follows  : 

"  It  will   not  do  to  attempt  to  parry  the  force  of  this  reductio  ad 
absurdum,  by  saying  that  slavery  under  Abraham  was  not  THE  SAME 
THING  as  by  the  SLAVE  CODE  OP  THE  SOUTH,  for  we  shall  see  a  little  far 
ther  on,  that  the  ancient  slavery  was,  IN  PRINCIPLE,  JUST  SUCH  AS  THAT 
21* 


476  SLAVERY    IN   POLEMICS. 

ENACTED   BY   THE   SLAVE    CODE   OF   THE   SOUTH    NOW."        Of   Abrahamic 

times,  he  says:  "The  language  of  that  era  was  as  THOROUGHLY  PER 
MITTED  BY  THE  INFLUENCE  OF  SLAVERY,  as  that  of  the  Southern  States 
now."  Again:  "The  civil  code  of  Moses  permitted  and  regulated 
slavery,  in  the  main  recognizing  THE  SAME  PRINCIPLES  as  the  modern 
slave  codes  of  the  Southern  States."  Again:  "The  LAW  OF  SLAVERY 
in  the  Mosaic  code,  contemplates  the  slave  as  BOTH  A  PERSON  AND  A 

CHATTEL,  JUST  AS  THE  SOUTHERN  SLAVE  CODE  DOES. 

These  declarations  have  one  merit ;  they  are  direct,  clear, 
and  unmistakable.  Their  demerit  is,  their  total  want  of 
truth. 

POINTS    OF   DIFFERENCE    BETWEEN   THE   JEWISH   AND 
SOUTHERN    SYSTEMS. 

If  any  persons  are  so  poorly  acquainted  with  their  Bibles 
and  with  the  system  of  Southern  slavery  as  to  believe  that 
the  laws  of  the  Jewish  servitude  and  the  "  slave  codes"  of 
the  Southern  States  are  of  "  the  same  principles,"  we  will 
point  out  to  them  a  few  characteristics  of  difference.  We 
are  not,  at  this  point,  to  deal  with  the  argument  by  which 
the  writer  attempts  to  prop  up  his  assumption ;  we  are 
only  concerned  with  the  assumption  itself.  It  is  a 
simple  question  of  fact ;  a  matter  of  truth,  or  falsehood  as 
to  the  agreement  or  disagreement  of  these  systems.  And 
it  will  be  borne  in  mind,  that,  in  order  to  sustain  the  posi 
tion  which  Dr.  Robinson  takes,  it  is  necessary  to  show,  that 
in  regard  to  each  and  every  one  of  the  essential  character 
istics  of  the  Southern  "  slave  codes,"  there  is  an  exact  and 
full  correspondency  in  the  laws  of  the  Jewish  system.  If 
there  is  a  failure  to  make  out  this  complete  correspondency 
in  any  one  particular  his  assumption  falls  to  the  ground. 

Among  the  radical  principles  in  which  the  two  systems 
differ  are  these. 

1.  By  Southern  law,  slaves  are  "chattels  personal." 
This  is  the  legal  definition  in  terms.  The  code  of  South 


JEWISH    AND    SOUTIIEBN    SYSTEMS.  477 

Carolina  says  :  "  Slaves  shall  be  deemed  chattels  personal, 
in  the  hands  of  their  owners  and  possessors,  and  their  exe 
cutors,  administrators,  and  assigns,  to  all  intents,  construc 
tions,  and  purposes,  whatsoever."* 

The  Jewish  system  does  not  in  this  manner  completely 
divest  the  bondman  of  his  manhood.  There  is  no  statute 
in  the  Mosaic  code  so  utterly  dehumanizing  as  this,  or 
which  bears  any  correspondency  with  it.  If  so,  let  it  be 
shown.  We  challenge  its  production.! 

2.  By  Southern  law,  a  slave  can  own  no  property ;  can 
not  control  any  of  the  avails  of  his  own  labor.  This  is  ex 
pressly  denied  him.  The  civil  code  of  Louisiana  says  :  "  A 
slave  is  pne  who  is  in  the  power  of  a  master  to  whom  he 
belongs.  The  master  may  sell  him,  dispose  of  his  person, 
his  industry,  and  his  labor.  He  can  do  nothing,  possess 
nothing,  nor  acquire  any  thing,  but  what  must  belong  to  his 
master."| 

In  the  Jewish  system,  no  statute  thus  prevented  those 


*  The  most  elaborate  and  authoritative  work  on  slavery,  recognized  as  setting  forth 
the  law,  is  that  of  General  Thomas  R.  R.  Cobb,  of  Georgia,  published  in  1858,  entitled. 
"The  Law  of  Negro  Slavery  in  the  United  States."  In  defining  slavery,  he  says : 
"Slavery,  in  its  more  usual  and  limited  signification,  is  applied  to  all  involuntary 
servitude,  which  is  not  inflicted  as  a  punishment  for  crime.  *  *  *  It  has,  at  some 
time,  been  incorporated  into  the  social  system  of  every  nation  whose  history  has  beeu, 
deemed  worthy  ot  record.  In  the  former  condition  the  slave  loses  all  personality : 
in  the  latter,  while  treated  under  the  general  class  of  things,  he  possesses  various 
rights  as  a  person,  and  is  treated  as  such  by  the  law."  General  Cobb  was  a  lawyer  of 
eminence,  a  brother  of  Howell  Cobb;  was  an  Elder  in  the  Presbyterian  Church,  and 
a  member  of  its  General  Assembly  at  New  Orleans,  in  1858;  and  was  killed  in  battle 
at  Frederick  sburg,  Va.,  in  December,  1862. 

t  Dr.  Mielziner,  of  Copenhagen,  is  spoken  of  as>  "the  learned  Jew,"  and  as  one  of 
"the ablest  writers  upon  the  Hebrew  economy  ;""  Heinrich  Ewald,  of  Gottingen,  as 
"a  great  authority  in  Hebrew  Antiquities;"  Prof.  Saalschutz,  of  Konigsberg,  as  one 
"whose  works  on  the  Mosaic  Polity  are  of  the  highest  standing;"  and  Joseph  Salva 
dor,  "the  Rabbinical  scholar  of  Paris ;"  all  "men  versed  in  the  Hebrew  language  and 
in  Jewish  customs.11  These  eminent  Hebraists  agree  in  this— that  "  the  laws  of 
Moses  nowhere  recognize  the  right  of  properly  in  m  an,  nor  concede  to  the  master  an 
absolute  proprietorship  over  the  person  of  his  servant.1" 

J  General  Cobb  says:  "Of  the  other  great  absolute  right  of  a  freeman,  viz.,  the 
right  of  private  property,  the  slave  is  eiithvly  deprived.  His  person  and  his  time 


478  SLAVERY    IN   POLEMICS. 

in  servitude  from  "  acquiring"  and  "  possessing"  property, 
This  alone  settles  the  heaven-wide  difference.  But  this  is 
not  all.  There  are  statutes  which  inevitably  imply  that 
the  Hebrew  servant  might  and  did  acquire  and  hold  prop 
erty. 

3.  By  Southern  law,  the  slave  is  doomed  to  hopeless 
ignorance.     It  is  a  penal  offence  to  teach  him  to  read  or 
write  ;  even  to  teach  him  to  read  the  word  of  God  ;  much 
less  is  any  legal  injunction  found  for  his  religious  training. 
The  exceptional  cases  of  actual  instruction,  unless  it  be  oral, 
are  in  direct  contravention  of  law. 

No  such  statutory  prohibition  can  be  found  regulating 
Jewish  servitude.  On  the  contrary,  numerous  statutes 
enjoin  instruction  in  all  religious  duties,  and  open  wide 
the  door  to  all  religious  ordinances.  It  was  a  statutory 
offence  ngainst  God  and  man  for  a  Hebrew  master  to  omit 
these  things.  Dr.  Robinson  himself  gives  the  proof  and 
illustration  of  this,  in  what  he  says  of  the  regulations  of 
the  Jewish  Church. 

4.  In  many  of  the  slave  codes  of  the  South,— perhaps  in 
all, — colored  persons,  whether  bond  or  free,  are  prohibited 
from  merely  assembling  for  the  worship  of  God,  even  to 
receive  oral  religious  instruction,  or  from  meeting  for  any 
other  purpose,  without  the  presence  of  a  specified  number 
of  white  persons.* 

There  is  no  such  statute  as  this  regulating  Jewish  servi 
tude. 

5.  By  Southern  law,  all  slaves  are  vendible  "  property." 

being  entirely  the  property  of  his  master,  whatever  he  may  accumulate  by  his  own 
labor,  or  is  otherwise  acquired  by  him,  becomes  immediately  the  property  of  his 
master." — Law  of  Negro  Slavery. 

*  Under  this  feature  of  the  slave  code,  General  Cobb  gives  a  judicial  decision 
touching  the  authority  of  the  "  patrol"  in  times  of  danger  from  insubordination : 
"In  South  Carolina,  it  was  held,  that  under  the  authority  to  disperse  unlawful 
assemblages  of  negroes,  the  patrol  bad  no  right  to  interfere  with  an  open  assemblage 
for  the  purpose  of  religious  worship,  where  white  parsons  were  alfto  assembled."— 
Law  of  Negro  Slavery. 


JEWISH    AND    SOUTHERN   SYSTEMS.  479 

They  are  sold,  by  law,  the  same  as  mules,  tobacco,  and 
cotton.  Without  this  feature  of  vendibility  in  the  "  slave 
codes," — prevailing,  so  far  as  the  law  is  concerned,  univer 
sally,  in  the  South, — the  system  would  be  comparatively 
worthless.  Many  families,  and  certain  Border  States,  have 
found  in  this  feature  of  the  system  one  of  the  greatest 
sources  of  their  wealth;  and,  for  the  sake  of  gain,  masters 
sometimes  sell  their  own  children,  begotten  of  slave  mothers. 
This  is  notorious.  This  is  also  ACCORDING  TO  LAW  ;  for, 
by  the  "codes,"  the  child  follows  the  condition  of  its 
mother,— -partus  sequitur  ventrem, — and  every  one  having 
any  "black  blood"  belongs  to  the  proscribed  class. 
General  Cobb,  in  his  "  Law  of  Negro  Slavery,"  says : 
"  The  issue  and  descendants  of  slaves,  in  the  maternal  line, 
are  slaves.  The  rule  has  been  adopted  in  all  the  States" 
This  domestic  traffic  in  slaves  has  been  the  life,  profit,  and 
power  of  the  system.  Without  it,  slavery  in  the  extreme 
South,  where  it  has  been  most  profitable,  and  exerted  its 
greatest  power,  at  home  and  throughout  the  country, 
would  shrivel  and  perish. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  Hebrew  servitude  was  wholly 
destitute,  both  in  law  and  fact*  of  this  feature  of  vendibility, 
except  in  specified  cases  ;  as  for  crime,  debt,  and  one  other 
instance.  The  fact  that  these  were  specified  cases,  shows 
that  the  Jewish  system  knew  nothing  of  that  feature  which 
is  so  prominently  stamped  upon  the  Southern  system  in 
practice,  and  which  under  positive  statute  law  may  be  uni 
versal.  This  characteristic  of  the  Southern  "  codes"  is 
noichere  found  in  the  Mosaic  law.  While  Hebrews 
might  "  buy"  of  surrounding  nations  (in  a  sense  which  it  is 
not,  at  this  point,  our  purpose  to  consider),  there  is  no 
evidence,  either  in  law  or  fact,  that  any  Jew  ever  sold,  in 
the  way  it  is  commonly  done  in  the  South,  and  legally 
sanctioned  as  universal  (except  in  the  specified  cases),  a 


480  SLAVERY    IN   POLEMICS. 

single  bondsman  to  any  other  Jew  or  to  a  heathen.  If 
this  is  denied,  let  the  law  and  the  case  be  shown.  But 
yet,  in  order  to  make  the  Mosaic  "  code"  parallel  with  the 
Southern,  it  must  be  shown  that  the  vendibility  of  Jewish 
bondmen  was,  by  the  statute,  universal.  This  is  the  vital 
point  of  correspondency  to  be  shown ;  and  this  does  not 
exist. 

6.  By  Southern  law,  a  slave  cannot  be  a  witness  in  any 
case  against  a  white  person.  His  master,  or  any  other 
white  person,  may  maltreat  him  in  the  extreme, — may 
wilfully  murder  him, — in  the  presence  of  fifty  slaves  who 
are  as  capable  of  testifying  to  the  fact  as  any  white  person, 
and  yet  their  testimony  is  worthless,  in  law.* 

Even  Roman  slavery,  which  many  have  regarded  as  the 
worst  system  that  ever  existed,  was  better  than  the  South 
ern  on  this  point.  The  Emperor  Constantine  not  only 
allowed  slaves  to  be  witnesses,  but  gave  those  their  free 
dom,  by  an  edict,  who  testified  against  fraud,  adultery, 
and  certain  other  offences  where  freemen  were  involved. 

*  "  Where  a  slave  is  killed,  the  presumption  of  law  is  the  same  as  in  other  cases  of 
homicide,  that  it  was  done  maliciously.  On  account  of  the  frequent  and  necessarily 
private  relation  of  master  and  slave,  remote  most  generally  from  the  presence  and 
view  of  any  white  person  competent  to  be  a  loitness,  this  presumption  may  and  must 
often  operate  to  the  prejudice  of  the  slayer,  there  being  no  means  of  proving  the 
provocation  given.  Under  this  view,  the  Act  of  South  Carolina  provides,  that  where 
the  homicide  is  committed,  and  no  competert  witness  is  present  at  the  time  to  testify 
to  the  whole  transaction,  the  affidavit  of  the  accused  in  admitted  be/ore  the  jury, 
explanatory  and  exculpatory  of  his  conduct  on  the  occasion." — "It  would  seem 
that  from  the  very  nature  of  slavery,  and  the  necessarily  degraded  social  position  of 
the  slave,  many  acts  would  extenuate  the  homicide  of  a  slave,  and  reduce  the  offence 
to  a  lower  grade,  which  would  not  constitute  a  legal  provocation  if  done  by  a  white 
person.  Thus,  in  The  State  v.  Tttckett*  it  was  held  competent  for  one  charged  with 
the  murder  of  a  slave  to  give  in  evidence  that  the  deceased  was  turbulent,  and 
insolent,  and  impudent  to  white  persons." — "  On  account  of  the  perfectly  unpro 
tected  and  helpless  position  of  the  slave,  when  his  master  is  placed  in  opposition  to 
him:  not  being  allowed  to  accumulate  property,  with  which  to  provide  means  for 
the  prosecution  of  his  rights;  his  mouth  beiny  closed  as  a  witness  in  a  court  of 
justice ;  his  hands  being  tied,  even  for  his  own  defence,  except  in  the  extreme  cases 
before  alluded  to ;  his  time  not  being  at  his  service,  even  for  the  purpose  of  procur 
ing  u-stimony,"  &e. — Cobb'a  Law  of  Nagro  Slavery. 


JEWISH    AND    SOUTHERN    SYSTEMS.  481 

"No  statutory  prohibition  of  bondmen  being  witnesses 
can  be  found  in  the  Mosaic  code.  Although  there  may  be 
no  statute  authorizing  testimony,  as  explicit  as  that  of  Con- 
stantine,  yet  the  whole  character  of  the  Jewish  system 
would  naturally  lead  us  to  presume  that  those  in  servitude, 
otherwise  competent,  were  allowed  to  testify  against  crime, 
whoever  might  be  the  offender.  But  the  absence  of  any 
such  positive,  prohibitory  statute,  as  is  found  in  all  the 
Southern  "  codes,"  marks  the  essential  difference  in  the 
systems. 

The  foregoing,  among  many  other  differences  in  the  two 
systems  here  compared,  relate  chiefly  to  the  individual. 
There  are  strongly  marked  differences  which  relate  to  their 
social  character. 

7.  By  Southern  law,  marriage  among  slaves  is  a  nullity. 
It  has  no  legal  recognition,  existence,  or  protection.     The 
master  is  authorized  to  separate,  at  pleasure  and  forever, 
those  who  live  together  under  the  name  of  husband  and 
wife.     This  is  often  done  in  fact,  for  pecuniary  gain  and 
from  other  motives.* 

On  the  other  hand,  the  statutes  of  the  Mosaic  code  regu 
lating  marriage  are  full  and  explicit,  both  positive  and 
prohibitory,  and  these  statutes  were  binding  upon  all 
classes.  In  the  South,  such  unions  as  are  formed  among 
the  slaves  are  often  within  the  degrees  of  consanguinity 
and  affinity  forbidden  by  the  Mosaic  laws. 

8.  The  whole  family  constitution  as   God  made  it,  is 
utterly  blotted  out  among  slaves,  by  Southern  law.     The 
slave  offspring  of  these  teeming  millions  are  the  result  of 
a  systematic,  perpetual,  universal  violation  of  the  seventh 

*"The  inability  of  the  slave  to  contract  extends  to  the  marriage  contract,  and 
hence  there  is  no  recognized  marriage  relation  in  law  between  slaves.1"  "Tha 
contract  of  marriage  not  being  recognized  among  slaves,  of  course  none  of  its  conse 
quences  follow  from  the  contubernal  state  existing  between  them." — CobUs  Law  of 
Negro  Slavery, 


482  SLAVERY    IN    POLEMICS. 

command  of  the  Decalogue ;  and  this  by  the  positive  legis 
lation  of  Christian  States.  These  offspring  may  be  torn 
from  those  who  have  borne  them,  and  parents  and  children 
are  often  thus  separated  forever.* 

Jewish  servitude  knew  nothing  of  this  wholesale  and 
utter  sweeping  away  of  the  most  important  institution  God 
has  given  for  the  social,  civil,  and  religious  well-being  of 
mankind.  To  charge  this  feature  of  the  universal  slave 
system  of  the  South  upon  the  Jewish  system, — and, indeed, 
the  same  of  every  other  point  noticed, — and  to  say  that  it 
is  of  God,  is  to  utter  both  falsehood  and  blasphemy. 

The  foregoing  points  show  what  Southern  slavery  is  as 
a  system  /  not  the  evils  incidental  to  it,  but  what  it  is  in 
its  vital  essence,  and  how  it  works,  by  laic  ;  evils  which 
are  inherent  in  it  and  inseparable  from  it,  as  both  the 
General  Assembly  of  1818  and  the  Committee  of  the  Synod 
of  Kentucky  affirm.  The  system,  as  such,  could  not  exist 
a  day  without  these  radical  legal  features. 

9.  Our  final  point,  therefore,  in  this  comparison,  is,  that 
this  system,  by  Southern  law,  is  made  perpetual.  All  slaves, 
legally  considered,  must  look  upon  their  posterity  as 
doomed  to  it  to  the  latest  generation. 

The  Jewish  system,  to  say  the  least  of  it,  provided  for 
the  freedom  of  a  portion  of  those  in  servitude  at  the  year 
of  Jubilee,  and  of  another  portion  in  the  seventh  year ; 
while  many  able  scholars  (which  we  barely  mention  as  a 
fact)  contend  that  provision  was  made  for  the  freedom  of 
all  who  were  held  in  servitude  at  the  Jubilee. 

On  the  other  hand,  many  of  the  slave  codes  of  the  South 

*  -'The  marriage  relation  not  being  recognized  among  slaves,  none  of  the  relative 
rights  and  duties  arising  therefrom,  belong  strictly  to  the  slave.  *  *  *  We  may 
make  the  same  assertion  in  reference  to  the  relation  of  parent  and  child.  In  som« 
of  the  States,  both  of  these  relations  are  so  far  recognized  by  the  Legislature,  as  to 
provide  by  statute  against  their  disruption  in  public  sales.1'— CoWs  Law  of  Negro 
Slavery, 


PROFESSORIAL  JUDGMENT  OF  THE  CASE.      483 

make  it  next  to  impossible  for  individual  masters,  when  so 
disposed,  to  give  freedom  to  their  slaves  ;  while  others  pro 
hibit  emancipation  altogether,  making  it  a  statutory  offence. 
There  is  thus  a  wide  legal  difference  between  the  sys 
tems  concerning  emancipation. 

PROFESSORIAL    JUDGMENT    OF    THE    CASE. 

But  we  need  go  no  further  in  this  enumeration,  though 
there  are  other  points  of  marked  contrast.  THIS  is  THE 
SYSTEM  of  the  South  which  Dr.  Robinson  not  only  has  the 
hardihood  to  approve,  but  which  he  has  the  unblushing 
effrontery  to  declare  is  of  "THE  SAME  PRINCIPLES"  as  that 
which  existed  in  the  time  of  Abraham  and  Moses,  and 
which  God  incorporated  into  His  Church  !  For  a  more 
full  delineation  of  it, — as  a  system  in  practice,  inevitably 
resulting  from  such  "codes," — we  again  ask  the  reader  to 
recur  to  the  paper  of  the  Committee  of  the  Synod  of  Ken 
tucky,  and  refresh  his  mind  with  what  they  set  forth  as  the 
inherent  essence  of  the  system,  AS  SEEN  IN  REAL  LIFE 
AMONG  THEMSELVES,  and  then  he  will  make  some  small 
approach  towards  understanding  what  that  specific  thing 
is  which  Dr.  Robinson  applauds  and  commends,  and  which 
he  declares  is  taken  into  close  fellowship  by  the  Head  of 
the  Church ! 

If  we  were  called  upon  to  resolve  the  moral  phenome 
non  presented  in  this  case,  we  might,  perhaps,  adequately 
do  it  by  citing  what  a  distinguished  Professor  of  Theology 
has  written.  The  Princeton  Hevieic,  for  January,  1861, 
in  an  article  on  The  State  of  the  Country,  says :  "  Most 
men,  when  they  condemn  slavery,  have  certain  slave  laws 
in  their  minds  ;  laws  which  forbid  the  slaves  to  be  in 
structed,  which  declare  they  cannot  contract  marriage,  or 
which  authorize  the  forcible  separation  of  husbands  and 
wives,  parents  and  children.  But  Southern  Christians 


484  SLAVERY    IN    POLEMICS. 

condemn  these  laws  as  heartily  as  we  do.      INDEED  NO 

MAN   CAN  BE  A  CHRISTIAN  WHO  DOES   NOT  CONDEMN  THEM." 

Dr.  Hodge  here  lays  down  the  abstract  principle.  We 
shall  not  make  the  concrete  application ;  but  we  abridge 
no  man's  liberty. 

PROSLAVERY    ARGUMENTS    EXAMINED. 

We  come  now  to  the  arguments  for  slavery.  We  shall 
notice  only  some  of  the  more  prominent,  and  can  give 
them  but  a  comparatively  brief  examination.  We  shall 
take  up  those  founded  on  Scripture  first,  and  afterwards 
those  drawn  from  the  Law  of  Nature.  The  latter,  indeed, 
will  require  no  examination,  provided  negro  slavery  in  the 
South  can  be  sustained  by  the  former ;  for  if  we  have  a 
"  Thus  saith  the  Lord"  for  it,  in  a  written  revelation,  it  is 
of  little  consequence  to  interrogate  the  less  clear  light  of 
nature  and  reason. 

What,  then,  do  the  Scriptures  teach  ?  At  the  outset, 
let  the  point  which  the  advocates  of  the  system  must 
establish  be  distinctly  kept  in  mind.  THEY  MUST  snow 

THE     DIRECT     AUTHORITY     OF     SCRIPTURE     FOR     SOUTHERN 

NEGRO  SLAVERY.  They  claim  to  be  able  to  do  this.  They 
are  confident  they  have  done  it.  They  deem  those  to  be 
stupid  who  do  not  see  it,  and  "  infidel"  who  do  not  ac 
knowledge  it.  We  must  then  hold  their  arguments  to 
this  specific  point. 

So  far  as  the  present  issue  is  concerned,  it  is  wholly 
immaterial  what  the  Scriptures  of  the  Old  and  New 
Testaments  may  teach  about  the  systems  of  their  day, 
unless  those  teachings  sanction  negro  slavery  in  the 
Southern  States  with  the  same  kind  and  the  same  fulness 
of  authority  by  which  they  sanction  the  Jewish  and 
Roman  systems  of  their  own  times,  and  concerning  which 
it  is  conceded  they  directly  speak.  We  may, — and  of 


THE  ARGUMENT  FROM  THE  DECALOGUE.       485 

course  we  freely  do, — admit  as  true  every  thing  of  fact 
and  principle  which  is  actually  taught  in  the  Scriptures 
concerning  those  systems ;  and  yet,  all  which  is  thus  true 
concerning  them  will  go  for  absolutely  nothing  in  the 
present  argument,  unless  the  nexus  which  it  is  claimed 
infallibly  unites  the  modern  system  to  the  ancient,  under 
the  sanction  of  these  divine  teachings,  is  made  as  clear  as 
the  light. 

Premising  these  plain  points  as  fundamental,  we  take 
up  several  specific  arguments  separately.  The  order  of 
examination,  though  not  material,  suggests,  naturally,  that 
which  is  first  in  importance.. 

THE    ARGUMENT   FROM    THE    DECALOGUE. 

It  is  insisted  by  all  Southern  extremists  that  slavery  is 
ordained  in  the  Decalogue.  Any  references  we  here  make 
to  their  language  will  be  to  the  quotations  given  in  a  pre 
ceding  chapter.  Says  Dr.  Thornwell :  "  God  sanctions  it 
in  both  tables  of  the  Decalogue."  Dr.  Robinson  :  "  In 
two  precepts  of  this  law, — the  fourth,  concerning  the 
Sabbath,  and  the  tenth,  concerning  covetousness, — slavery 
is  again  recognized  as  existing  in  the  Church  by  command, 
in  reference  to  man-servants  and  maid-servants."  Dr. 
Smyth :  "  God  has  actually  embodied  slavery  in  his  moral 
law,  and  by  there  guarding,  and  protecting,  and  regulating 
it,  has  made  it  appertain  to  the  present  condition  of 
humanity." 

The  Decalogue  is  permanent  and  universal  in  its  au 
thority.  It  is  the  law  for  man  as  man.  If  it  "  embodies" 
and  "  sanctions"  the  slavery  for  which  Southern  men  con 
tend,  the  argument  is  ended.  The  claim  that  it  does, 
rests  upon  the  meaning  of  two  words.  That  meaning  is 
assumed,  in  the  quotations  \ve  have  made,  rather  than 
established.  It  is,  that  the  terms  in  the  original,  ren- 


486  SLAVBKY    IN   POLEMICS. 

dered  "man-servant"  and  "maid-servant,"  in  the  fourth 
rind  tenth  commandments,  mean,  necessarily,  slaves,  in  the 
sense  of  Southern  slave  law.  If  the  claim  does  not  cover 
this,  it  is  of  no  consequence  in  the  present  discussion.  If 
it  does  cover  and  sustain  it,  we  give  up  the  point. 

What  then  do  these  words  mean  ?  This  is  more  or  less 
a  matter  of  opinion  and  exegesis,  in  which  men  differ. 
Much  sholarship  has  been  expended  to  ascertain  the  truth. 
We  shall  give  eminent  Jewish  authorities,  rather  than  our 
own  opinion. 

The  Hebrew  term  rendered  "man-servant,"  in  the  Deca 
logue,  is  JEbed.  Remarking  upon  this  word,  Dr.  Mielziner, 
before  mentioned,  the  eminent  Jewish  scholar  of  Copen 
hagen,  says,  that  it  is  "  a  name  common  to  all  who  stood 
in  a  dependent  or  subordinate  relation  ;"  that  it  "  has  not 
the  degrading  meaning  which  we  connect  with  the  word 
'  slave'  or  '  bondman,'  but  often  has  the  more  mild  signi 
fication,  Avhich  we  associate,  in  certain  relations,  with  the 
term  '  servant.'  "  Prof.  Saalschiltz,  of  Konigsberg,  says : 
that  "  the  language  of  the  Hebrews  has  no  word  for  stig 
matizing  by  a  degrading  appellation  one  class  of  those 
who  owe  service,  and  distinguishing  them  from  the  rest 
as  '  slaves,'  but  only  one  term  for  all  who  are  bound  to 
render  service  to  others.  For  males,  this  word  is  Ebed, 
servant,  or  man-servant  •  properly,  laborer  •  for  females, 
Shifchah,  Ama,  maid-servant,  maid"* 

One  of  the  most  earnest  advocates  of  a  former  day  for 
the  Scriptural  authority  for  slavery  in  the  South, — so  far 
as  deduced  from  the  meaning  of  one  of  the  words  in 
question,  as  found  in  the  Decalogue  and  elsewhere, — in 
noticing  an  objection  to  his  view,  says  :  "  It  is  said,  the 
Hebrew  word  Ebed,  translated  sometimes  servant,  some- 

*  Mielziner,  Die  Verhaltninse ;  Saalschiitz,  Z>as  Mosaische  liecht;  as  cited  by 
Dr.  Thompson  in  his  "  Christ,  and  Email" 


THE  ARGUMENT  FROM  THE  DECALOGUE.      487 

times  man-servant,  and  sometimes  bond-servant,  does  not 
mean  a  slave,  but  only  a  worker,  one  who  is  employed  for 
a  time,  and  even  a  relation  of  service  of  a  highly  honor 
able  kind."  He  then  makes  this  admission  :  "The  word 
JEbed  is  translated  as  above,  and  in  itself  properly  signifies 
a  worker,  a  laborer,  a  person  who  does  work  of  any  kind 
at  all,  for  another  person."*  This  admission  is  all  that  is 
desired,  and  perfectly  agrees  with  the  eminent  Jewish 
scholars  referred  to  above. 

If  then  the  two  words,  found  in  the  Decalogue,  on  which 
Southern  men  rest  the  whole  argument  for  negro  slavery, 
from  that  source,  may  have  this  wide  latitude  of  meaning 
which  the  ablest  scholars  in  Jewish  learning  give  them,  all 
the  systems  of  slavery  may  perish  throughout  the  earth, 
and  no  system  ever  again  arise  to  curse  the  world,  and  yet 
this  part  of  the  Decalogue  concerning  "man-servants"  and 
"maid-servants"  would  be  just  as  applicable  to  society  as 
ever.  It  would  still  be  the  law  for  mankind  everywhere, 
and  be  appropriate  wherever  there  were  "  laborers,"  or 
"  workers,"  or  "  servants,"  who  were  yet  in  every  sense 
freemen,  and  in  no  sense  slaves. 

An  argument  is  pressed  by  some  writers,  drawn  from 
the  tenth  commandment,  which  is  not  confined  to  the 
meaning  of  the  words  in  question,  but  is  deemed  to  be 
confirmatory  of  the  essential  meaning  which  it  is  claimed 
those  words  have.  For  example,  it  is  said,  that  "  man 
servant"  and  "maid-servant"  must  indicate  those  who 
were  held  as  "  property,"  for  covetousness,  the  sin  here 
forbidden,  always  has  reference  to  "property."  The 
premises  here  are  false.  A  person  may  "covet"  that 
which  is  another's,  whether  it  be  his  property  or  not.  In 
point  of  fact  this  is  often  done.  Many  a  person,  iu  daily 
life,  violates  the  tenth  commandment,  by  coveting  the 

*  '-Tin.-.  Integrity  of  our  National  Union  vs.  Abolitionism,"  by  Dr.  Geo.  Junkin. 


488  SLAVERY    IN    POLEMICS. 

"man-servant"  or  "maid-servant"  who  is  but  a  hired 
laborer.  More  than  this, — if  the  prohibition  to  "  covet"  a 
servant,  in  the  tenth  commandment,  necessarily  implies 
that  the  servant  is  "  property,"  or  a  "  slave"  in  the  sense 
of  Southern  law,  then  the  prohibition  to  "  covet"  a  "  wife," 
in  the  same  commandment,  implies  that  she  also  is  a 
"  slave"  in  the  same  sense.  This  is  simply  absurd.  We 
readily  grant  that  under  the  Jewish  Jaw,  under  the 
Roman  law,  under  English  law,  and  perhaps  under  law  in 
every  country  in  the  world,  the  "  wife"  is,  in  a  certain 
sense,  the  "  property"  of  her  husband.  But  who  will  pre 
tend  from  this  that  there  is  a  parallel  in  the  condition  of 
the  "  wife"  under  the  Decalogue,  and  the  condition  of  the 
"  slave"  under  Southern  law  ?  And  yet  if  the  tenth  com 
mandment  does  not  make  the  "wife"  a  "slave"  in  the 
sense  of  Southern  law,  no  more  does  it  make  a  "man 
servant"  or  a  "  maid-servant"  a  "  slave"  in  that  sense. 
But  if  it  does  not  make  the  "  servant"  a  "  slave"  in  that 
sense,  then  it  makes  him  a  "  slave"  in  no  sense  applicable 
to  the  present  case. 

THE    ABRAHAMIC    AND   MOSAIC    SYSTEM. 

Besides  the  Decalogue,  there  are  two  sources  of  author 
ity  for  Southern  slavery  claimed  from  the  Old  Testament. 
One  is,  the  system  of  servitude  as  regulated  under  Abra 
ham  ;  the  other,  as  authorized  by  the  code  of  Moses.  For 
our  purpose  we  may  notice  them  together. 

The  specific  point  to  be  made  out  by  our  opponents  is, 
tli at  these  regulations  afford  precisely  the  same  sanction 
for  Southern  slavery  that  they  do  for  the  ancient  system. 
We  here  pass  by,  entirely,  the  usual  facts  and  reasonings 
urged  to  show  that  the  Old  Testament  servitude  was  an 
essentially  different  system  from  that  of  Southern  slavery, 
in  all  its  elemental  principles,  designs,  and  actual  v/orkiug. 


THE    ABRAHAMIC    AND    MOSAIC    SYSTEM.  489 

We  have  already  stated  certain  points  of  difference.  We 
pass  by,  also,  the  reasons  for  which  many  have  supposed 
that  system  was  established,  or  allowed  and  regulated. 
For  the  argument's  sake,  we  here  admit  all  that  is  claimed 
for  the  ancient  system,  as  drawn  from  the  two  sources 
named. 

What,  then,  was  the  fundamental  authority  for  that 
system,  both  as  to  matter  and  form  ?  It  was  sanctioned 
by  the  most  direct  and  positive  authority  of  God,  The 
form  of  the  sanction  was  through  express  revelation,  em 
bodying  commands,  covenants,  and  both  positive  and 
prohibitory  statutes;  by  the  several  covenants  made  at 
different  times  with  Abraham,  and  by  the  numerous 
statutes  of  the  code  of  Moses.  This,  we  presume,  is  the 
utmost  which  any  one  has  ever  claimed  for  the  Jewish 
system,  and  this,  for  the  sake  of  the  argument,  we  at 
present  concede. 

Now,  all  we  demand  is  this  :  Show  us  the  same  fulness 
of  authority  for  Southern  slavery,  in  matter  and  form,  and 
we  instantly  yield  the  ground.  Give  us  positive  Divine 
sanction,  through  express  revelation  ;  give  us  the  com 
mands,  covenants,  statutes,  and  ordinances, — or  even  one 
of  any  of  all  these, — which  as  specifically  designate  negro 
slavery  in  the  South  as  do  those  of  the  Old  Testament 
unquestionably  designate  the  ancient  system, — that  is,  let 
these  commands  designate  the  race  of  Southern  masters 
with  the  same  definiteness  that  Jewish  masters  were  desig 
nated,  and  point  out  the  particular  people  who  may  and 
those  who  may  not  be  enslaved,  as  is  done  in  the  Jewish 
code— do  all  this,  and  we  will  say  no  more.  But  until  this 
is  done,  the  indispensable  nexus  is  wanting.  Until  this  is 
done,  it  is  just  as  reasonable  to  send  us  to  the  statutes  of 
the  Tycoon  as  to  the  statutes  of  Moses  for  authority  for 
Southern  slavery. 


490  SLAVERY   IN   POLEMICS. 

We  have  never  been  able  to  see, — and  we  sincerely 
desire  some  one  to  explain, — how  it  is  that  the  Southern 
system  is  necessarily  hitched  on,  to  the  Mosaic,  so  that  the 
ancient  inevitably  draws  the  modern  along  by  its  authority. 
This  is  a  thing  which  is  assumed.  We  insist  that  it  shall 
be  proved.  The  only  semblance  of  a  connection  between 
the  two  which  Dr.  Robinson  in  his  long  argument  attempts 
to  make  out,  expressly  in  order  to  show  that  the  Southern 
system  is  authorized  by  the  ancient,  is,  that  in  their 
"  principles,"  tried  by  their  respective  "  codes,"  the  two 
systems  are  "the  same."  That  he  deems  this  the  vital 
and  turning  point  in  the  case,  is  seen  in  the  fact  that  he 
presses  this  declaration  at  four  different  stages  of  his 
argument,  in  nearly  the  same  words,  all  of  which  we  have 
given.  But  we  have  already  shown  that  this  assumed 
sameness  is  utterly  groundless. 

AUTHORITY  IN    CONTRAST. 

But  suppose,  for  the  sake  of  the  argument,  that  we  admit 
this  assumed  identity  in  "  principles," — admit  that  these 
"  codes"  are,  in  every  characteristic,  precisely  the  same  ; 
that  the  Southern  is  an  exact  copy,  word  for  word,  of  the 
Mosaic, — still,  no  shadow  of  sanction  for  the  Southern  sys 
tem  can  result  from  such  identity.  It  is  an  identity  in 
AUTHORITY  which  must  be  established  ;  but  that  does  not 
result  from  an  identity  in  "  principles."  If  we  look  at  the 
real  sanction  for  the  two  systems, — admitting,  for  the 
moment,  that  they  are  alike  in  "  principles," — we  shall  see 
the  world-wide  difference  bet  ween  them  in  this  vital  matter 
of  authority. 

For  the  Jewish,  there  is  this  authority :  GOD  ALMIGHTY 
did,  by  express  revelation,  Himself  ordain  a  code  for  the 
benefit  of  a  specific  people,  Jewish  masters,  "chosen"  by 


AUTHORITY    IN    CONTRAST.  491 

Himself •  and  HE  did  also2  by  express  revelation,  designate 
the  people  who  should  serve  them  under  that  code. 

For  the  Southern,  there  is  this  authority :  SOUTHERN 
LEGISLATORS  do,  without  revelation,  themselves  ordain  this 
code,  four  thousand  years  afterwards,  for  the  benefit  of 
another  specific  people.  Southern  masters,  "chosen"  by 
themselves  •  and  THEY  do  also,  without  revelation,  desig 
nate  the  people  who  shall  serve  them  under  that  code. 

Now,  can  Southern  masters,  by  virtue  of  this  identity 
in  the  "  principles"  of  the  respective  codes,  claim  divine 
sanction  for  slavery?  This  assumed  identity  is  nothing 
to  the  purpose.  It  is,  as  before  stated,  an  identity  in 
AUTHORITY  which  must  be  established, — which  shall  em 
brace  it  in  form  and  substance,  as  directly  from  God, — or 
Southern  slavery  can  receive  no  support  from  the  Jewish 
system.  Such  identity  of  authority,  no  man  can  show ; 
nor  any  other  kind  of  authority  by  which  the  Southern 
system  can  be  sheltered  under  the  Jewish.  DIRECT  REVE 
LATION  is  what  is  demanded  to  meet  the  case. 

If  this  total  want  of  Divine  sanction  for  Southern  slavery, 
— in  the  matter  and  form  stated, — be  not  conclusive 
against  its  being  authorized  by  the  ordinances  regulating 
Mosaic  servitude,  then  this  result  follows  of  logical  ne 
cessity  :  that  any  system  of  slavery  which  men  may  choose 
to  inaugurate, — at  any  time,  in  any  place,  among  any  peo 
ple  as  masters,  over  any  people  as  slaves,  by  any  means, 
in  any  manner,  from  any  motive, — may  immediately  claim, 
on  precisely  the  same  grounds,  when  once  fully  established 
among  a  people,  the  same  Divine  authority,  and  must  at 
once  be  acknowledged  as  coming  under  this  broad  shield 
of  the  Divine  protection  ;  and  he  who  does  not  admit  all 
this  of  any  system  "  got  up  to  order,"  is,  in  the  language 
of  Southern  extremists,  an  "infidel,"  an  "apostate,"  and 
"  blasphemes  the  God  of  Israel !"  This  is  the  inevitable 
22 


492  SLAVERY    IN   POLEMICS. 

logical  result  of  the  position  taken  and  the  argument  pre 
sented. 

We  deem  the  foregoing  considerations  conclusive  against 
the  assumption  that  Southern  negro  slavery  is  of  necessity 
sheltered  under  the  ordinances,  covenants,  statutes,  and 
commands,  of  the  Old  Testament  system  of  servitude,  and 
may  therefore  challenge  for  itself  Divine  sanction  on  such 
grounds.  Make  the  "  principles"  of  the  ancient  system  to  em 
brace  just  what  you  please, — covering  every  fact  which  the 
Scriptures  declare, — and  yet,  if  these  covenants  and  statutes 
do  not,  upon  the  very  face  of  them,  show  the  Divine  and 
direct  designation  of  negro  slavery  in  the  South,  as  clearly 
as  they  designate  the  Jewish  system,  they  no  more  author 
ize  Southern  slavery  than  they  authorize  the  system  of  the 
Algerine  corsairs. 

THE   NEW   TESTAMENT   AKGTTMENT. 

The  argument  for  Southern  slavery  drawn  from  the  New 
Testament,  rests  upon  a  different  basis  from  that  drawn 
from  the  Old.  It  is  not  claimed  that  ordinances  and  cove 
nants  of  precisely  the  same  character  as  those  regulating 
Jewish  servitude,  are  found  for  the  system  of  Greek  and 
Roman  slavery  of  the  time  of  Christ  and  the  Apostles.  It 
is  insisted,  however,  that  they  recognized  it  as  existing,  in 
the  State  and  in  the  Church,  in  their  day  ;  that  they  gave 
no  command  for  its  removal  from  either,  but  gave  direc 
tions  for  the  duties  of  masters  and  servants  ;  and  that  it  is 
placed  in  the  same  category  with  the  matrimonial  and 
parental  relations,  and  is,  therefore,  like  them,  an  "  ordi 
nance  of  God,"  of  permanent  and  equal  authority  :  from 
all  which  is  drawn  the  broad  conclusion  that  the  negro 
slavery  of  the  South  is  a  lawful  system,  and  is  on  like 
grounds  an  "  ordinance  of  God."  These  points,  it  will  be 
seen,  are  covered  by  the  quotations  previously  given. 


SLAVERY    HANGING    BY    A    WORD.  493 

As  in  the  argument  on  the  other  branches  of  the  subject, 
so  here,  we  shall  pass  by  many  points  which  are  often 
effectively  made  in  opposition  to  some  of  the  positions 
taken  and  the  conclusions  reached  in  favor  of  slavery. 

SLAVERY    HANGING   BY    A   WORD. 

All  who  have  paid  any  attention  to  discussions  of  the 
subject,  know  that  much  has  b^en  written  upon  the  mean- 
in  «•  of  a  single  Greek  word.  Doulos*  in  New  Testament 

O  O  ' 

discussions,  has  figured  as  largely  as  Ebed,  in  the  Old. 

Dr.  Robinson  inquires,  in  the  article  to  which  we  have 
before  referred,  "  What  can  be  more  absurd,  than  the 
dogma  of  white-cravatted  infidelity,  that '  servant'  (doulos), 
in  Scripture,  means  a  hireling,  or  apprentice,  not  a  slave  ?" 
This  is  his  entire  argument  upon  the  point,  in  an  elaborate 
paper  in  which  he  says :  "  We  have  aimed  to  present  at  one 
view  an  outline  of  the  whole  argument  against  the  anti- 
slavery  dogmas,  as  gathered  from  the  inspired  teaching  of 
the  Church  in  all  these  eras,"  embracing  both  the  Old  and 
New  Testament  dispensations. 

We  would  remind  Dr.  Robinson  that  his  distinguished 
friend,  Dr.  Thornwell,  always  wore  a  "  white  cravat."  He 
should  therefore  regard  that  part  of  his  argument  as  dis 
posed  of.  So  far  as  there  is  any  point  in  his  inquiry  about 
the  meaning  of  the  word  in  question,  we  propose  to  meet 
it  with  something  better  than  a  sneer ;  something,  too,  that 
will  probably  have  more  weight  with  him  than  any  thing 
we  could  say. 

PROF.    LEWIS    ON   DOULOS. 

Prof.  Tayler  Lewis,  occupying  the  chair  of  Greek  in 
Union  College,  is  an  eminent  scholar ;  and  from  a  com 
mendatory  notice  of  an  article  of  his  which  has  appeared 
in  The  True  Presbyterian,  we  presume  its  editor  may  be  in 


494  SLAVERY    IX   POLEMICS. 

a  st:ite  of  mind  to  heed  what  he  says  about  doulos.  He 
says  of  the  Professor  :  "  It  may  be  a  weakness  of  ours,  but 
we  confess  to  a  particular  sympathy  with,  and  pleasure  in, 
the  curious,  semi-platonic  and  scholarly,  but  earnest  and 
soul-reaching  method  in  which  Prof.  Tayler  Lewis  always 
writes  of  the  Scriptures,  and  their  interpretation" 

Upon  this,  we  are  certainly  justified  in  commending 
Prof.  Lewis's  "  interpretation,"  which  is  "  always"  so  valu 
able,  to  Dr.  Robinson.  We  do  not  remember  the  color  of 
Prof.  Lewis's  cravat,  but  we  heard  an  apdress  from  him  in 
New  York  some  years  since,  and  he  then  had  on  a  blue 
coat  with  gilt  buttons.  He  thus  discourseth  : 

Much  learning  has  been  exhibited  in  respect  to  the  word  douloi. 
There  is  no  doubt  that  it  may  denote  the  servile  condition.  It  is  equally 
clear  that  it  is  a  term  of  government,  and  may  signify  a  subject  from 
the  highest  to  the  lowest  rank.  It  may  imply  both  ideas.  But  there 
is  a  word  in  the  Greek  language  that  has  the  one,  the  lowest  one,  ex 
clusively  and  forever.  It  is  always  servile.  It  is  ever  used  to  denote 
slaves  as  property,  and  in  a  property  sense.  As  thus  employed,  it  is 
exceedingly  common  in  the  classical  Greek — always  used,  we  may  say, 
•when  the  servile,  notion  is  to  be  expressed  simple  and  unmixed.  It  must 
have  been  very  familiar  throughout  Asia  Minor,  and  wherever  Paul 
found  the  reality  or  the  semblance  to  the  relation,  It  is  the  word  andra 
podon.  It  is  of  the  neuter  form,  to  express  vileness,  to  denote  that  that 
to  which  it  is  applied  is  regarded  as  a  thing  or  chattel,  without  will,  or 
a  true  acknowledged  personality.  When  slaves  are  statistically  enume 
rated  as  property,  they  are  called  andra  poda,  just  as  cattle  or  flocks  are 
called  by  similar  neuters,  to  kteno,  ktenea,  ktemala,  probata.  It  is  an  in 
teresting  query :  Why  is  this  servile  word,  so  common  in  Athenian 
Greek,  never  found  in  the  New  Testament?  It  is  because  there  is  no  idea 
acknowledged  there  ivhich  it  could  properly  express. 

We  now  give  Dr.  Robinson  all  the  benefit  he  can  derive 
from  doulos,  with  all  the  aid  he  cnn  get  from  the  entire 
coterie  of  those  who  claim  that  the  word  necessarily  means 
a  "'  slave ;"  and  we  leave  it  wholly  to  him  to  choose  the 
color  of  their  cravats.  We  trust  that  Prof.  Lewis's 


PROF.    LEWIS    ON    SLAVE-TRADERS.  495 

"scholarly"  performance  may  prove  "  soul-reaching"  to  the 
whole  of  them. 

PROF.    LEWIS    ON    SLAVE-TRADERS. 

There  is  an  exegesis  from  Prof.  Lewis,  following  the 
above  extract,  which  is  further  serviceable  here.  It  knocks 
certain  declaimers  for  Southern  slavery,  and  those  who 
denounce  man-stealing^  completely  "  off  their  pins,"  and 
turns  the  argument  against  them  with  a  force  which 
should  make  them  wince.  The  Professor  says : 

There  is  one  word  used  in  the  New  Testament,  a  derivative  of  this 
word  (1  Tim.  i.  10),  but  in  such  a  way  that  it  will  do  the  man  who  is 
hunting  Scriptural  pleas  for  slavery  no  good.  It  is  andra  podiates,  ren 
dered  man-steakr,  but  clearly  wrong.  The  form  of  the  ending  shows 
that  it  does  not  denote  an  occasional  act,  an  occasional  theft,  but  a 
business,  an  occupation  Andra  podisies  is  not  a  man-thief,  but  a  MAN- 
TRADER,  a  SLAVE-TRADER,  or  a  SLAVE-DEALER  ;  one  whose  business  is  to 
sell  an  andra  pod<>n :  just  as  kermatistes  (John  ii.  14)  does  not  mean  money- 
stealcr,  but  money -seller,  broker,  "money-changer."  So  in  the  Memora 
bilia,  Socrates  metaphorically  calls  the  Sophists  who  took  pay  for  their 
lectures,  andra podiatcs,  men  who  sold  themselves  for  servile  h'.re.  Look 
at  the  association  in  which  this  term  is  found  (1  Tim.  i.  10),  and  then 
judge  whether  the  idea  of  that  thing  in  which  the  andra  podistes  dealt, 
or  the  idea  of  human  property,  could  ever  have  been  applied  by  the 
Apostle  to  a  man,  much  less  to  a  Christian  brother.  What  an  ungodly 
crew! — "the  unholy  and  profane,  murderers,  fornicators,  SLAVE-TRA 
DERS,  liars,  perjurers,  and  all  else  that  is  opposed  to  pure  doctrine." 

Who  does  not  remember  to  have  heard  this  passage 
often  quoted  from  Timothy  to  show  direct  condemnation 
by  Paul  of  the  practice  charged  upon  certain  men  for  en 
ticing  away  slaves  from  the  South,  calling  them  "inen- 
stealers !"  We  are  not  defending  theft ;  nor  do  we  refer 
to  this  passage  to  justify  the  practice  charged.  "Let 
every  tub  stand  on  its  own  bottom."  We  refer  to  it  to 
show  that  it  has  nothing  to  do  with  condemning  that 
practice.  Bat  it  has  much  to  do  with  another  thing.  It 


496  SLAVERY   IN   POLEMICS. 

condemns  men-traders.  It  is  a  bolt  wielded  by  the  Apos 
tle  Paul,  under  the  guide  of  inspiration,  which  crushes  at 
one  blow  the  whole  domestic  slave-trade,  and  all  concerned 
in  it, — to  say  nothing  of  the  foreign  slave-trade, — on  the 
ground  claimed  by  all  the  advocates  of  Southern  slavery, 
that  these  teachings  of  the  Apostle  bear  as  directly  on 
that  system  as  they  did  upon  the  Greek  and  Roman 
slavery  of  his  time ;  a  domestic  slave-trade  which  is  the 
very  life  and  power  of  the  whole  system,  and  out  of  which 
certain  of  the  Border  States  have  coined  millions  of 
wealth.  This  is  another  "  scholarly"  performance,  which 
we  hope  also  may  prove  "  soul-reaching"  to  all  who  may 
need  the  benefit  of  it. 

We  now  leave  Dr.  Robinson  in  company  with  his  doulos, 
and  we  place  alongside  of  him  the  andra  podon,  the  andra 
podistes,  and  the  Apostle  Paul ;  the  latter  a  "  noble  old 
Roman  citizen."  We  do  not  know  the  color  of  Paul's 
cravat,  nor  the  color  of  that  of  any  of  these  Greek  gentle 
men;  so  we  cannot  tell  whether  their  company  will  be 
agreeable  or  otherwise. 

We  cannot  close  this  part  of  the  subject  without  giv 
ing  another  extract  from  Prof.  Lewis.  He  is  speaking  of 
the  use  proslavery  men  make  of  some  of  Paul's  teachings ; 
and  the  sarcasm  will  apply  to  all,  but  especially  to  Pro 
fessors  Morse  and  Christy,  The  True  Presbyterian,  and 
all  others  who  with  them  (and  we  do  not  know  of  any 
exceptions)  deem  slavery  an  essential  antecedent  to  the 
most  successful  evangelization  of  a  "  barbarous"  race  : 

And  now,  to  take  these  holy  things,  and  make  from  them  an  argu 
ment  in  favor  of  slavery  as  it  exists  in  the  United  States,  of  cotton 
growing  slavery,  our  trafficking,  mercenary,  properly-claiming  slavery, 
that  will  sell  a  man,  his  children,  and  his  children's  children,  for  its 
own  worldly  gain,  and  then  content  itself  with  the  poor,  conscience- 
soothing  plea,  that  perhaps  he  may,  somehow,  get  Christianized  in  th& 
process!  It  is  rank  sacrilege. 


SLAVERY  AMONG  THE  RELATIONS.          497 


SLAVERY  AMONG  THE  RELATIONS. 

The  position  in  which  slavery  is  mentioned  by  the 
Apostles,  among  certain  recognized  and  permanent  rela 
tions  in  society,  is  deemed  by  many  the  most  formidable 
argument  in  its  favor.  It  is  presented  by  all  the  advocates 
of  the  Southern  system,  and  is  regarded  as  conclusive  and 
overwhelming.  It  is  substantially  this :  that  slavery,  in 
the  New  Testament,  is  placed  on  an  equality,  as  to  au 
thority  and  permanency,  with  the  civil,  matrimonial,  and 
parental  relations,  as,  with  them,  "  an  ordinance  of  God." 
This  claim,  taken  in  connection  with  the  conceded  fact 
that  injunctions  are  given  to  both  masters  and  servants, 
as  well  as  to  the  persons  filling  the  other  relations,  is 
deemed  as  presenting  a  valid  and  unanswerable  sanction 
for  Southern  slavery.  It  is  the  argument  from  the  greater 
to  the  less ;  from  the  acknowledged  authority  of  three 
relations, — the  civil,  matrimonial,  and  parental, — to  the 
authority  of  a  fourth,  the  servile.  As  they  are  classed 
together,  and  the  duties  of  each  are  specified,  their  authority 
is  equal,  and  the  relation  in  each  case  permanent.  That  is 
the  argument. 

Says  Dr.  Ross  :  "  Slavery  is  of  God,"  and  "  Slavery  is 
ordained  of  God;"  as  between  master  and  servant,  "it  is 
a  relation  belonging  to  the  same  category  as  those  of  hus 
band  and  wife,  parent  and  child."  Says  Dr.  Thornwell : 
k'  The  Apostles  are  explicit  in  inculcating  the  duties  which 
sprung  from  both  sides  of  the  relation."  Speaking  at 
length  of  the  four  relations,  Prof.  Morse  calls  them,  "  the 
social  system  which  God  has  ordained."  Dr.  Robinson  : 
*'  The  duties  of  the  relation  of  master  and  servant  are  dis 
cussed  in  common  with  the  duties  of  parent  and  child, 
husband  and  wife."  The  True  Presbyterian :  "  The 
Saviour  Himself  accepted  slavery  as  being  equally  of  God 


498  SLAVERY   IN   POLEMICS. 

with  civil  government,  marriage,  and  the  parental  relation." 
And  so  say  they  all. 

THE    REDUCTIO    AD    ABSURDUM. 

The  exalted  position  here  given  to  slavery  involves 
these  logical  absurdities:  (1.)  It  makes  slavery  an  essen 
tial  and  universal  element  of  society.  (2.)  It  makes 
emancipation  a  sin. 

These  are  inevitable  deductions  from  the  doctrine  main 
tained.  We  no  longer  wonder,  therefore,  that  men  who 
hold  the  doctrine  can  write  books,  like  Mr.  Fit zh ugh,  of 
Virginia,  on  "The  Failure  of  Free  Society,"  nor  that 
among  certain  Southern  men,  as  Drs.  Palmer,  Thornwell, 
and  Armstrong,  there  should  have  been  such  lamentations 
of  mourning  and  sorrow  over  the  condition  of  things  in 
the  Free  States,  concerning  which,  however,  they  know 
so  little.  We  are  no  longer  surprised  that  they  should 
wish  to  make  slavery  universal.  We  no  longer  wonder 
that  this  stupendous  rebellion  is  prosecuted  in  the  interest 
of  this  doctrine;  for  the  institution  it  defends  is  one  of  the 
very  pillars  of  the  whole  social  fabric,  of  the  family,  of  the 
State,  and  of  the  Church.  Let  us  glance  at  these  two 
points. 

SLAVERY    UNIVERSALLY   ESSENTIAL. 

1.  The  doctrine  propounded  upon  these  relations 
makes  slavery  an  essential  and  universal  element  of 
society.  How  can  it  be  otherwise,  if  it  is  in  all  respects 
equal  to  the  matrimonial,  parental,  and  civil  relations? 
Writers  generally  have  considered  three  of  these  relations 
as  "  ordained  of  God,"  viz.,  the  civil,  or  that  of  ruler  and 
ruled  ;  the  connubial,  or  that  of  husband  and  wife ;  the  pa 
rental,  or  that  of  parent  and  child  ;  that  these  three  belong 
to  society  universally,  as  God  designed  it,  and  are  essential 


SLAVERY    UNIVERSALLY    ESSENTIAL.  499 

to  the  existence,  as  well  as  to  the  well-being,  of  mankind  in 
a  social  state ;  and  that  these  three  are  all  which -God  has 
directly  "ordained"  for  that  end.  But  our  modern 
philosophers  make  a  fourth,  the  servile,  which  they  place 
in  "  the  same  category."  We  do  not  see,  therefore,  on 
this  basis,  why  slavery  is  not  essential  to  the  very  exist 
ence  of  society,  in  the  form  in  which  God  has  authorized 
and  organized  the  social  state. 

Can  society  be  maintained  without  civil  government  ? — 
or  without  marriage  ? — or  without  the  parental  relation  ? 
No  Christian  will  pretend  it.  Nor,  upon  this  theory,  can 
it  be  maintained  without  slavery.  Strike  down  any  one 
of  the  other  relations,  and  society  perishes.  Blot  out  civil 
government,  and  anarchy  reigns  and  society  is  in  ruins. 
Destroy  marriage,  and  the  race  becomes  extinct,  or  uni 
versal  concubinage  must  perpetuate  it ;  and  in  either  case, 
destruction  to  the  parental  relation  is  the  result.  So,  also, 
upon  this  theory,  society  can  no  more  be  perpetuated 
without  slavery  than  without  these  other  relations,  for 
it  is  equally  with  them  an  "  ordinance  of  God,"  and  in 
"  the  same  category."  This  is  the  inevitable  logical 
result  from  the  premises  ;  and  it  demonstrates  the  perfect 
absurdity  of  giving  slavery  that  position  among  the 
authoritative  and  permanent  relations  of  society. 

But  is  it  said,  that  all  that  is  meant  is,  that  slavery  is 
merely  a  universally  admissible  relation?  Then  we  ask,  in 
reply :  Is  civil  government  merely  an  admissible  institu 
tion,  that  may  be  continued  or  dispensed  with  at  pleasure  ? 
Is  marriage,  as  an  institution  or  relation,  merely  admissi 
ble  ;  and  may  it  be  set  aside  altogether  for  the  institution 
of  "  free  love  ?"  May  the  parental  relation  be  supplanted 
by  any  substitute  which  would  result  from  overthrowing 
the  matrimonial?  Not  one  of  these  three  institutions, 
involving  these-  relations,  is  merely  fidmis*ible  in  the 
22* 


500  SLAVERY   IN   POLEMICS. 

Divine  organization  of  society.  It  cannot  be  organized 
and  perpetuated,  as  God  designed  it,  without  them.  They 
are  each  and  all  enjoined  as  essential  to  its  existence  and 
perpetuity.  Then,  of  logical  necessity,  on  the  ground  now 
claimed,  slavery  is  also  enjoined,  as  a  universal,  permanent, 
and  essential  element,  in  the  Divine  organization  and  con 
tinuance  of  society.  This  conclusion  is  unavoidable  ;  or, 
the  premise  that  slavery  is  an  "ordinance  of  God,"  in 
"  the  same  category"  with  these  other  relations,  is  alto 
gether  untenable. 

EMANCIPATION    A    SIN. 

2.  So,  also,  of  logical  necessity,  this  doctrine  makes 
emancipation  a  sin.  One  of  the  things  which  is  always 
insisted  upon  by  proslavery  writers  is,  that  the  ]STew  Tes 
tament  is  utterly  silent  about  emancipation.  Well,  let  it 
be  granted  ;  and  then  what  follows  ?  If  slavery  is  an 
"  ordinance  of  God"  in  the  sense  that  marriage  is,  what 
right  have  we,  by  emancipation,  to  destroy  the  relation 
essential  to  it,  in  any  case,  without  express  revealed 
authority  from  God  ?  To  do  so  is  sin.  Can  we  set  aside 
marriage,  in  any  case,  by  sundering  the  relation  of  hus 
band  and  wife,  except  upon  the  ground  for  which  the 
Scriptures  expressly  provide,  without  heinous  sin  ?  Can 
we  sever  the  parental  relation  without  sin?  Can  we 
overturn  lawful  civil  government  without  sin  ?  Are  not 
all  these  essential  to  society,  and  "  ordained  of  God  ?" 
Xo  more  can  we,  upon  the  doctrine  claimed,  set  aside 
slavery  without  sin ;  neither,  on  the  one  hand,  by  procla 
mation,  or  law,  or  military  power,  or  by  any  other  whole 
sale  measures ;  nor,  on  the  other,  in  any  individual 
case.  To  do  this  in  any  way  or  to  any  extent,  without 
an  explicit  "  Thus  saith  the  Lord,"  from  His  word, 
either  expressly  permissive  or  directory,  is  to  sin  against 


INVASION    OF    GOD'S   PREROGATIVE.  501 

God  with  a  high  hand,  if  slavery  is  His  "ordinance;" 
and   this   is,  also,  to   overthrow    one   of  the   pillars   of 

society. 

INVASION    OF   GOD'S   PREROGATIVE. 

The  case  of  Dr.  Ross  is  most  remarkable  for  a  Christian 
minister.  He  writes  a  book,  entitled,  "  Slavery  Ordained 
of  God."  In  the  book  he  tells  us  that  "Slavery  is  of 
God  ;'*  and  the  relation  essential  to  it  he  puts  into  "  the 
same  category  as  those  of  husband  and  wife,  parent  and 
child."  What  next?  He  tells  us  that  he  has  been  a 
slaveholder,  but  is  not  one  now.  He  has  "  emancipated 
his  slaves,"  and  the  act  cost  him  "  some  self-denial."  He 
does  not  boast  of  the  act,  but  evidently  regards  it  as  re 
dounding  to  his  credit. 

This  case  presents  a  singular  mixture  of  morals  and 
logic,  and  we  presume  Dr.  Ross  does  not  stand  alone.  It 
is  a  sound  principle,  on  every  ground,  that  the  only 
authority  which  can  warrant  a  person  in  setting  aside  a 
just  law  or  ordinance,  is  the  authority  that  established  it ; 
and  not  only  so,  but  the  manner  in  which  it  may  be  set 
aside  must  be  as  clearly  set  forth  as  are  the  provisions  of 
the  ordinance  itself.  This  principle  may  be  applied  to  the 
matter  in  hand.  Dr.  Ross  and  his  co-laborers  claim 
slavery  to  be  a  Divine  "  ordinance ;"  that  this  is  a  doc 
trine  of  written  revelation  ;  and  they  are  out  of  patience 
with  those  who  dissent.  They  do  not  pretend  that  they 
have  any  revelation  for  emancipation.  On  the  contrary, 
it  is  one  of  their  cardinal  doctrines  in  defence  of  the 
system,  that  the  word  of  God  is  utterly  silent  on  the  sub 
ject  of  emancipation.  And  yet  Dr.  Ross  coolly  tells  us 
that  he  has  "emancipated  his  slaves,"  or,  in  other  words, 
that  he  has  deliberately  abolished  an  "  ordinance  of  God ;" 
one  which  is  in  "  the  same  category"  with  marriage  and 


502  SLAVERY   IX   POLEMICS. 

the  parental  relation,  and  which,  therefore,  is  essential  to 
human  welfare;  that  he  did  it  with  "some  self-denial," 
but  nevertheless  he  did  it,  and  thinks  it  well,  and  wishes 
others  to  think  so.  We  should  suppose  that  such  an 
unwarranted  invasion  of  the  Divine  prerogative  ought  to 
have  cost  him  "  some  self-denial,"  and  not  a  little.  Would 
he  thus  repudiate  his  wife,  and  banish  his  children  ? 
Why  not,  with  equal  authority  ? 

THE    RELATIONS    IN    DIALOGUE. 

But  we  are  not  done  with  the  absurdities  of  this  doc 
trine.  We  have  noticed  two,  which  are  absurdities  in 
logic.  There  is  another,  partly  logical  and  wholly 
practical. 

It  is  a  little  remarkable  that  this  equality  of  authority 
for  these  several  relations  is  urged  to  sanction  the  system 
of  negro  slavery  in  the  South, — and  is  deemed  an  argu 
ment  of  such  force  as  to  put  to  silence  all  opposition, — 
when,  notoriously,  the  matrimonial  and  parental  relations, 
as  an  "  ordinance  of  Gcd,"  on  which  the  servile  relation 
is  made  to  rest  for  its  sanction,  are,  among  the  slaves, 
utterly  ignored  in  law,  and  have  no  existence  in  fact.  It 
is  most  amazing, — it  puts  all  logic  to  the  blush,  and  pre 
sumes  upon  ignorance  of  what  is  universally  known,  or 
supposes  a  stultification  of  conscience,  touching  the  sacred- 
ness  and  authority  of  ordinances  on  which  the  whole 
social  fabric  rests,  that  would  be  criminal, — to  see  men 
seriously  urge  the  lawfulness  of  a  given  relation,  on  the 
ground  of  the  lawfulness  of  two  other  given  relations, 
where  the  latter  are  confessedly  binding  upon  all  who 
enter  into  the  family  state,  when  these  two  are  utterly  re 
pudiated,  in  law  and  in  fact,  among  the  entire  people  on 
the  one  side  for  whom  the  lawfulness  of  the  first  is 
claimed. 


THE    RELATIONS    IN   DIALOGUE.  50H 

Good  morning,  Mr.  Smith.  Do  you  live  in  South 
Carolina  ? 

Yes. 

Do  you  deem  negro  slavery  a  divine  institution  ? 

Certainly. 

On  what  ground  ? 

The  relation  between  master  and  slave  is  upon  the  same 
ground  as  the  matrimonial  and  parental  relations.  They 
are  all  alike  "  ordinances  of  God." 

Do  these  other  two  relations  exist  among  your  own 
slaves,  Mr.  Smith,  as  "  an  ordinance  of  God  ?" 

They  live  together,  and  have  children. 

Are  they  lawfully  married  ? 

Our  "  slave  code"  does  not  recognize  marriage  among 
slaves,  so  that  we  can  exactly  call  it  "  an  ordinance  of 
God ;"  for,  it  must  be  confessed,  it  allows  us  to  sell  and 
separate  any  that  live  together,  and  their  children ;  and 
in  fact  that  is  often  done,  and  done  against  the  consent  of 
the  parties. 

Does  it  not  look  a  little  queer,  then,  Mr.  Smith,  that  you 
should  urge  a  divine  sanction  for  slavery  on  such  a  ground 
as  that  ? 

Our  ablest  divines  have  presented  that  argument  often; 
it  appears  sound. 

Their  reasoning  is  bad  enough,  at  best ;  but  it  would 
not  be  quite  so  strikingly  objectionable,  practically,  if  the 
other  two  relations  were  hedged  about  by  your  laws  as 
slavery  is.  Your  "  slave  code"  is  burdened  with  laws 
about  one  of  these  relations,  securing  all  the  interests  of 
slavery ;  but  the  other  two  are  ignored  in  law,  among  the 
slaves.  Is  not  that  a  singular  argument  for  the  one,  which 
is  based  upon  the  other  two,  where  the  two  have  no  exis 
tence  ? 

Oh!    but  our  laws  secure  the  rights  of  husbands  an cl 


504  SLAVERY    IN   POLEMICS. 

wives,  parents  and  children,  as  truly  as  they  do  those 
of  masters  and  slaves. 

How  is  that,  Mr.  Smith  ?  Did  you  not  say  that  the  laws 
make  no  provision  for  marriage  among  slaves,  and  that 
they  gave  you  authority  to  break  up  and  separate  families 
at  pleasure,  and  that  this  was  often  done  ? 

Yes ;  but  it  was  of  the  laws  about  these  two  relations 
among  the  whites  that  was  meant. 

Ah!  you  mean,  then,  that  two  of  these  relations  were 
"  ordained"  for  the  white  race  only,  and  that  the  other  was 
"  ordained"  for  the  negro.  Is  that  it,  Mr.  Smith  ? 

Well — it  is  about  that — practically. 

Then  the  argument  of  your  divines  to  show  God's  sanc 
tion  for  slavery,  drawn  from  the  social  relations,  is  this  : 
that  because  he  has  u  ordained"  marriage  and  the  parental 
relation  for  the  whites,  he  has  therefore  "  ordained" 
slavery  for  the  blacks.  Is  that  it  ? 

Well, — they  are  more  skilled  in  these  things  ;  you  must 
consult  them. 

Good  morning,  Mr.  Smith. 

Such  is  about  the  point  and  pith  of  the  argument  for 
negro  slavery  in  the  South,  drawn  from  the  matrimonial 
and  parental  relations,  for  the  sanction  of  the  system  as  an 
"  ordinance  of  God."  Two  of  the  relations  are  made  for 
the  master  only ;  the  other  for  the  slave. 

A    SOUTHERN   FAMILY    ESTABLISHED. 

Let  us  bring  the  argument  for  negro  slavery  based  upon 
these  several  relations,  as  each  an  "  ordinance  of  God,"  to 
a  practical  test  in  another  way.  Leaving  abstractions,  let 
us  take  a  real  case.  We  shall  assume  that  the  civil 
relation  of  ruler  and  ruled,  with  regard  to  the  case  now 
to  be  considered,  exists  properly,  and  we  shall  notice  only 
the  other  three  relations. 


A   SOUTHERN    FAMILY    ESTABLISHED.  505 

Here  is  a  family  of  four  persons.  It  consists  of  John 
Smith  and  Mary,  his  wife,  John  Smith,  Jr.,  their  son,  all 
white  persons ;  and  Peter,  a  negro  slave,  held  as  a  "  chattel" 
under  the  "  code"  of  South  Carolina,  in  the  name  of  the 
elder  Smith.  It  is  claimed  that  these  three  relations,  in 
this  concrete  case,  have  equally  the  sanction  of  Scripture, 
and  that  each  is  an  "  ordinance  of  God."  How  does  this 
appear  ?  Each  of  these  relations  had  a  beginning,  as  to 
that  particular  family  and  these  particular  persons.  How 
could  they,  of  right,  be  formed,  so  as  to  make  each  one, 
when  formed,  an  "ordinance  of  God  ?" 

There  is  no  difficulty  in  regard  to  the  first  two.  When 
John  Smith  wanted  a  wife,  whom  had  he  a  right  to  marry  ? 
Any  woman  in  the  wide  world,  not  within  the  prohibited 
degrees  of  consanguinity  or  affinity,  who  was  willing  to 
marry  him.  The  marriage  of  John  and  Mary  was  based 
upon  mutual  consent.  The  relation  of  husband  and  wife 
was  thus  properly  formed  between  them,  and  the  demands 
of  the  law  of  God  were  fully  met,  and  thus  the  first 
"  ordinance"  is  established  in  this  family  under  the  divine 
sanction.  John  Smith,  Jr.,  is  the  offspring  of  these  parents, 
begotten  and  born  in  lawful  wedlock.  The  second  or 
parental  relation  is  thus  formed  in  this  family,  according  to 
the  "  ordinance  of  God,"  and  is  therefore  brought  fully 
under  the  divine  sanction. 

We  have  now  only  to  provide  for  Peter,  and  to  see  if  we 
can  exalt  his  relation  into  an  "  ordinance."  How  shall  it 
be  done  ?  There  appear  to  be  some  practical  difficulties  in 
the  way  of  bringing  him  under  God's  "  ordinance,"  as  a 
slave  to  John  Smith,  though  he  is  John's  slave  under  South 
Carolina  law. 

Whatever  is  done  for  Peter's  relief,  must  be  done  in 
accordance  with  the  Scriptures,  for  it  is  an  "  ordinance  of 
God"  that  is  to  be  established. 


606  SLAVERY    IX    POLEMICS. 


DIVINE    ORDINANCES   PLAIN. 

All  God's  ordinances  are  explicit.  If  they  involve  the 
instituting  of  a  relation,  they  show  how  it  is  to  be  formed, 
and  what  is  essential  to  it.  Is  it  a  union  with  the  Church  ? 
The  Scriptures  show  in  what  this  consists,  the  terms  of 
communion,  the  requisite  qualifications,  and  how  member 
ship  is  to  be  formed.  Is  it  severance  from  the  Church  ? 
They  point  out  the  offences  which  justify  it,  the  officers  who 
are  to  judge,  and  the  several  successive  steps  to  be  taken. 
Is  it  of  baptism,  or  of  the  Lord's  supper  ?  They  are  full 
upon  every  point  touching  persons  and  things.  Is  it  of 
marriage?  They  declare  who  may  and  who  may  not  join 
to  constitute  this  relation,  and  point  out  the  sin  of  violating 
the  law.  Is  it  of  divorce  ?  They  define  what  may  and 
what  may  not  sever  the  relation  of  husband  and  wife. 

And  so  on  through  every  ordinance  ;  every  thing  essen 
tial  to  the  case  is  made  clear.  And,  be  it  observed,  it  is 
not  merely  the  duties  of  these  several  relations  which  the 
Scriptures  make  plain.  It  is  the  relations  themselves  upon 
which  they  give  light ;  the  persons  who  may  enter  into 
them,  and  all  the  requisites  for  their  formation. 

THE    SERVILE    RELATION    AS    AN    "  ORDINANCE." 

Now,  how  are  we  TO  FORM  this  relation  between  master 
and  slave,  so  that  it  may  be  an  "  ordinance  of  God,"  with 
the  same  undoubted  certainty  as  to  the  persons  who  may 
be  masters  and  the  persons  who  may  be  slaves,  and  all 
other  things  essential  to  it,  as  in  the  case  of  every  other  con 
ceded  "  ordinance  of  God  ?"  Do  the  Scriptures  give  us 
any  light  whatever  on  these  points  ?  How  can  we,  at  the 
start,  put  Peter  into  the  family  of  John  Smith,  of  South 
Carolina,  so  that  the  relation  which  Peter  will  then  sustain 
to  John  as  his  slave,  will  be  in  the  same  sense  an  "  ordi- 


THE    SERVILE    RELATION    AS    AN    "ORDINANCE."       507 

nance  of  God"  that  the  marriage  tie  by  which  John  and 
Mary  are  husband  and  wife,  is  an  "ordinance  of  God?" 
What  is  there  in  Scripture,  as  regards  this  "  ordinance," 
to  show  that  Peter  might  not  just  as  well  have  been  the 
master,  and  John  the  slave?  We  put  aside  mere  abstrac 
tions  at  present,  and  we  wish  the  doctrine  applied  to  this 
concrete  case.  If  it  cannot  explain  the  relation  existing 
between  John  and  Peter,  and  how  it  was  originally  formed 
as  an  "  ordinance  of  God,"  the  doctrine  cannot  apply  to 
any  case.  It  must  first  establish  the  relation  between 
John,  the  master,  and  Peter,  the  slave,  and  then  vindicate 
it  as  God's  ordinance.  What  is  the  process  for  doing  this, 
pointed  out  in  Scripture  ? 

We  have  no  difficulty  in  putting  Peter  into  the  family 
of  John  Smith  as  his  slave,  under  the  statute  law  by  which 
he  is  held.  We  can  kidnap  him-  from  Africa,  by  Col. 
Larnar  and  the  slave  ship  Wanderer;  or  we  can  transmit 
him  by  inheritance  from  the  honorable  family  of  Smith,  in 
the  line  of  John's  ancestors ;  or  wre  can  buy  him  of  Wade 
Hampton  with  John's  money ;  or  we  can  give  John  a 
"  clean  bill  of  sale"  from  a  friend  as  a  gift,  with  "  one 
dollar"  as  a  consideration.  We  can  exhaust  all  the  possi 
ble  modes  by  which  he  could  have  been  made  and  held  a 
slave,  and  brought  into  this  relation  to  John  Smith,  any 
one  of  which  would  stand  the  test  of  South  Carolina  law ; 
and  yet,  we  fail  to  find  any  one  of  them,  or  all  of  them 
together,  anywhere  set  forth  as  the  modes  by  which  this 
relation  may  be  constituted,  so  as,  without  question,  to 
make  it  an  "  ordinance  of  God,"  as  the  matrimonial  and 
parental  relations  are  acknowledged  to  be;  while,  how  to 
exalt  Peter  into  "an  ordinance"  in  a  Scriptural  manner  \& 
the  vital  question  at  issue. 

Now,  can  it  be  possible,  that  a  relation  where  such 
momentous  interests  are  involved,  can  be  elevated  to  the 


508  SLAVERY    IN   POLEMICS. 

dignity  of  a  divine  "  ordinance,"  founded  on  revelation, 
and  put  on  a  par  with  the  matrimonial  and  parental  rela 
tions, — a  relation,  as  in  negro  slavery  in  the  South,  involv 
ing  life,  liberty,  the  grossest  ignorance,  ignoring  marriage, 
breaking  up  families, — and  yet,  the  Scriptures  be  utterly 
silent  on  the  manner  of  its  formation,  and  the  persons 
who  may  enter  it,  on  the  one  side  and  the  other,  while 
they  are  so  full  on  these  points  touching  every  other  re 
lation  where  an  "  ordinance  of  God"  is  concerned  ?  Credat 
J~if,dceus  Apella. 


THE  ONLY  LOOPHOLE,  AND  THAT  CLOSED. 

There  is  but  one  possible  resort  by  which  any  advocate 
of  this  doctrine  can  attempt  to  relieve  the  case  of  Peter ; 
and  that  we  have  already  met,  and  it  will  avail  him  noth 
ing.  The  New  Testament  can  throw  no  light  upon  it. 

The  only  thing  left  is  to  go  back  to  the  time  of  Abraham 
and  Moses,  to  the  Jewish  law,  which  would  allow  Peter 
to  be  "  bought  with  (John's)  money,"  as  "  bondmen"  were 
then  bought  of  the  "heathen."  But  that  resort  presents 
sundry  difficulties  which  we  have  already  noticed. 

As  we  are  now  confined  to  a  specific  case,  we  say  as 
before,  that  until  you  show  as  unequivocal  commands  as 
Abraham  and  Moses  had,  commands  as  directly  addressed 
to  the  present  race  of  masters  as  those  ancient  commands 
wore  addressed  to  the  Jews  as  a  distinct  people,  you  can 
gain  nothing  by  that  resort ;  and  if  John  Smith  claims 
that  he  has  a  right  to  Peter,  under  those  ancient  com 
mands,  he  must  show,  that  he,  John  Smith,  infallibly  be 
longs  to  the  present  class  to  whom  like  commands  are 
addressed,  or  that  a  similar  command  has  been  addressed 
to  him  in  person.  All  this  must  be  as  certain  antecedently 
as  the  claim  which  any  Jew  could  make,  and  then  John 


THE    ONLY   LOOPHOLE,    AND   THAT   CLOSED.  509 

Smith  can  proceed,  but  not  before,  to  possess  himself  of 
Peter. 

If  these  positions  are  not  tenable,  then  we  say  as  before, 
that  any  person  or  any  number  of  persons,  without  any 
authority  whatever  from  God,  may  at  any  time,  and  in  any 
country,  get  up  a  system  of  slavery  "  to  order,"  and  imme 
diately  place  it  under  the  ancient  Jewish  law,  with  the 
same  good  reason  that  the  Southern  system  can  be  placed 
there. 

We  here  drop  the  discussion  upon  the  Scriptural  claim 
of  Southern  slavery  to  a  recognition  by  both  the  Old  and 
New  Testament.  There  are  other  arguments  which  are 
often  advanced  for  the  claim  which  it  is  unnecessary  to 
notice.  If  those  which  we  have  considered  cannot  be 
maintained,  the  claim  must  fall.  On  which  side  lies  the 
truth,  we  leave  the  reader  to  judge. 


510  SLAVERY   IN   POLEMICS. LAW    OF   NATURE. 


CHAPTER    XIV. 

SLAVERY   IN    POLEMICS.— LAW   OP   NATURE. 

IT  is  of  comparatively  little  consequence  to  Christian 
men,  what  the  "  Law  of  Nature"  may  teach  about  slavery. 
When  we  have  a  written  Revelation  from  God,  and  are 
told  that  slavery  is  "sanctioned,"  "ordained,"  "establish 
ed,"  "regulated,"  and  "sanctified,"  by  express  "com 
mands,"  "covenants,"  "statutes,"  and  "ordinances"  of 
His  word,  we  are  satisfied  with  simply  examining  this 
Revelation.  If  the  negro  slavery  of  the  South  can  be 
justified  by  the  Scriptures,  and  in  all  the  modes  claimed, 
that  is  quite  enough;  the  Law  of  Nature  cannot  add  any 
thing  to  this  testimony.  So,  on  the  other  hand,  after 
being  so  confidently  referred  to  the  Scriptures  for  full 
proof  for  negro  slavery,  if  we  find  the  evidence  fail,  we 
need  not  be  sent  to  Nature  to  have  the  case  mended. 
That  cannot  supply  our  need,  while  we  have  Revelation 
as  "an  infallible  rule  of  faith  and  practice." 

But  we  are  not  afraid  of  Nature,  her  Law,  or  her  teach 
ings.  In  examining  the  subject,  however,  so  as  to  derive 
any  practical  benefit,  and  especially  so  as  to  settle  the 
question  before  us,  we  are  met  at  the  outset  with 
difficulties. 

DISAGREEMENT    ON   WHAT   IS    THE    LAW    OF    NATURE. 

Men  are  not  agreed  upon  the  meaning  of  the  phrase, 
"Law  of  Nature;"  upon  wh:it  Nature  herself  is,  as  a  moral 
teacher;  upon  the  extent,  character,  and  authority  of  her 
teachings ;  whether  she  is  an  independent  and  authoritative 


THE    LAW    OF    NATUKE.  511 

teacher,  or  to  be  limited  by  Revelation  ;  or  how  her  teach 
ings  are  to  be  interpreted,  and  by  whom.  These  and  a 
thousand  other  things  come  up  for  settlement  before  we 
can  make  even  a  beginning  in  our  investigations.  We  are 
then  completely  at  sea  touching  this  whole  matter ;  and  it 
is  the  merest  folly  for  those  who  have  a  perfect  guide  in 
a  written  Revelation,  in  all  questions  of  morals,  to  leave 
that  to  follow  an  igms-fatuus. 

Dr.  Seabury,  in  defending  slavery  as  resting  on  the 
"  Law  of  Nature,"  defines' the  phrase  as  follows  :  "  By  the 
Law  of  Nature,  according  to  the  best  usage  among  the 
ancients,  and  universally  among  the  moderns,  is  meant,  as 
we  have  said,  that  rule  of  fitness  which  the  Deity  has 
established  for  the  government  of  men,  considered  as 
reasonable  creatures,  and  intended  for  mutual  society." 
Upon  this  definition,  three  things  may  be  observed.  (1.) 
Here  is  an  admission  that  this  law  is  not  understood  alike; 
for  he  speaks  of  the  "best  usage  among  the  ancients." 
They  then  differed  among  themselves,  as  all  men  know. 
(2.)  Men  also  now  differ  as  to  which  was  the  "best 
usage"  among  differing  opinions  in  former  times.  Dr. 
Seabury  is  a  case  in  point.  As  we  shall  see  hereafter,  he 
dissents  from  the  opinion  of  one  of  the  highest  authorities 
"  among  the  ancients."  (3.)  Nor  is  this  law  understood 
alike,  "  universally  among  the  moderns  ;"  for  nothing  is 
more  certain  than  that  men  now,  as  they  have  always 
dono,  on  ten  thousand  questions, — and  this  very  question 
of  slavery,  in  all  its  bearings,  is  a  striking  example  of  the 
fact, — widely  differ  as  to  what  "  that  rule  of  fitness"  is, 
of  which  he  speaks.  Modern  apologists  for  negro  slavery, 
— and  he  among  them, — deem  the  system  of  the  South 
pre-eminent  in  its  ''fitness"  for  both  master  and  slave; 
the  very  best  condition  of  things,  "intended  for  mutual 
society,"  as  taught  by  both  Nature  and  Revelation. 


512        SLAVERY  IN  POLEMICS. — LAW  OF  NATURE. 

Others  totally  dissent  from  these  opinions.  It  is  simply 
the  determination  to  push  this  doctrine  and  illustrate  this 
"fitness"  by  extending  negro  slavery  far  and  wide,  which 
is  now  deluging  this  nation  in  blood.  The  upshot  of  the 
whole  matter,  therefore,  is,  that  it  is  ludicrously  absurd, — 
not  to  say  criminal, — to  pretend  that  all  men  now  agree 
upon  the  "  Law  of  Nature,"  as  Dr.  Seabury  here  defines  it. 
The  Law  of  Nature, — so  far  as  there  is  any  such  thing, 
whether  we  understand  it  or  not, — is  the  Law  of  God.  He 
speaks  through  both  Nature  and  Revelation.  His  utter 
ances  from  them  are  harmonious.  They  are  but  different 
volumes  to  unfold  His  will.  Where  men  have  not  Reve 
lation,  Nature  is  their  guide.  But  what  is  the  guide  in 
such  a  case  ?  We  refer  only  to  human  opinions  as  we  find 
them;  what  answer  do  they  give?  Is  this  guide  the 
knowledge  of  God's  will  which  men  may  gather  from  His 
works  of  creation  and  providence  ? — or,  within  a  narrower 
view,  from  the  condition  of  human  society  ? — or,  in  a  still 
narrower,  from  the  voice  of  the  individual  soul,  the  reason, 
the  conscience  ? — or,  from  the  general  judgment  or  consent 
of  mankind  ? — or,  is  it  from  all  these  combined  ? — or,  is  it 
from  something  different  from  them  all?  Here,  again,  the 
philosophers  of  the  world  are  disagreed,  and  he  who 
attempts  to  follow  them  will  find  himself  befogged  and  in 
despair. 

DISAGREEMENT   IN    APPLYING   THE    LAW    OF   NATURE. 

To  show  the  bearing  of  all  this  upon  the  case  in  hand, 
we  need  only  observe  that  some  writers  declare,  with  an 
assurance  which  awes  timidity  into  submission,  that  the 
Law  of  Nature  justifies  slavery ;  that  it  is  founded  in  it 
and  approved  by  it ;  and  that  hence  all  nations  have  recog 
nized  slavery  as  proper  on  such  grounds.  But  other 
writers  as  directly  declare  that  the  Law  of  Nature  con- 


MORAL   PHASES    INVOLVED    IN   THE    APPLICATION.     513 

demns  slavery;  that  wherever  slavery  has  existed,  though 
it  may  have  prevailed  ever  so  widely,  it  has  always  been  in 
violation  of  this  law,  and  an  infringement  upon  the  inherent 
rights  of  man.  And  thus  the  ablest  men  are  in  conflict  on 
that  which  is  vital  to  the  whole  question.  They  disagree 
upon  matters  of  fact  and  of  principle ;  upon  what  the  law 
itself  is  ;  whether  it  approves  or  condemns ;  and  differ  upon 
its  application. 

When  Christian  men  cannot  agree  about  the  meaning 
of  a  written  Revelation  concerning  slavery,  it  is  worse 
than  idle  to  make  an  appeal  to  the  Law  of  Nature,  where 
the  matters  presented  for  its  justification  are  vastly  more 
indeterminate  and  inconclusive. 

MORAL   PHASES    INVOLVED   IN   THE    APPLICATION. 

It'  will  often  appear,  both  in  the  investigation  of  this 
branch  of  the  subject  and  that  concerning  slavery  being 
authorized  by  the  Scriptures,  that  men's  views  as  to  mat 
ters  of  fact,  principle,  interpretation,  and  application, 
covering  all  that  bears  upon  the  justification  of  slavery, 
are  more  Or  less  shaped  and  modified  by  the  circumstances 
of  their  education,  and  also  to  a  degree,  no  doubt  imper 
ceptibly  to  themselves,  by  their  interests.  It  is  an  un 
doubted  fact,  that  with  the  rarest  exceptions,  the  men  who 
have  justified  and  defended  slavery  as  a  divine  institution, 
as  an  "  ordinance  of  God,"  have  been  those  who  were  in 
some  way  interested  in  the  system,  directly  or  indirectly ; 
sometimes  through  a  pecuniary  interest,  and  sometimes 
through  their  social  or  other  relationships. 

It  is  no  impeachment  of  human  nature,  except  as  fallen 
and  blind,  and  no  unjust  invasion  of  any  proper  principle 
within  the  province  of  morals,  to  say  that  arguments  in 
favor  of  human  bondage, — and  especially  that  system  of 
chattelism  which  so  dehumanizes  both  the  master  and  the 


514  SLAVERY   IN   POLEMICS. — LAW    OF    NATURE. 

slave  as  to  make  a  man  formed  "in  the  image  of  God,"  the 
marketable,  vendible  commodity  of  another  man,  as  T, 
horse  and  an  ox, — when  universally  presented  by  those 
who  are  interested  in  the  system,  should  be  scrutinized 
with  some  degree  of  suspicion.  If  any  persons  to  whom 
this  may  apply  do  not  feel  themselves  complimented,  the 
fault  is  not  ours ;  it  is  the  fault  of  the  case.  Whatever 
else  may  be  said  of  the  Law  of  Nature,  this  is  a  true  prin 
ciple,  as  gathered  from  the  universal  observations  of  man 
kind, — meaning  now,  under  this  view  of  the  law,  simply 
the  universal  state  of  the  human  race,  as  fallen  beings, — 
that  all  men  are  more  or  less  swayed  in  their  judgments, 
reasoning^  and  feelings,  by  their  interests,  and  often  and  to 
a  degree  without  being  aware  of  it.  This  is  as  truly  settled 
in  the  convictions  of  mankind  as  any  other  fact  or  prin 
ciple. 

We  see  no  reason  why  the  principle  should  not  be 
applied  to  judgments,  reasonings,  feelings,  in  favor  of 
slavery  ;  but,  on  the  other  hand,  every  reason  why  it  should 
be  so  applied.  If  the  justice  and  force  of  the  application 
in  any  manner  depend  upon  the  degree  of  interestin  the  sub 
ject,  then  we  have  only  to  look  at  what  men  are  now  doing 
in  this  terrible  rebellion,  undertaken  and  prosecuted  for 
the  sake  of  slavery,  to  see  how  closely  their  opinions,  urged 
in  favor  of  the  system,  should  be  scanned. 

ILLUSTRATIVE  CONTRADICTIONS. 

Let  us,  now,  in  order  to  come  directly  to  the  matter  in 
hand,  first  give  an  example  or  two  to  show  the  contradic 
tion  of  wiitt'rs  upon  the  point  whether  slavery  is  justified 
or  condemned  by  the  Law  of  Nature. 

Dr.  Seabury  writes  a  book,  published  since  the  rebellion 
began,  entitled,  u  American  Slavery  distinguished  from  the 
Slavery  of  English  Theorists,  and  Justified  by  the  Law  of 


SLAVERY    AGAINST    NATURE.  515 

Nature."  He  says,  it  is  "  necessary  to  bring  the  question 
of  slavery  to  the  test  of  the  Law  of  Nature."  And  further: 
"Is  not  the  institution  agreeable  to  the  Law  of  Nature,  as 
well  as  the  law  of  the  land,  and  to  the  Scriptures  ?  This  is 
the  question  which  I  propose  to  examine."  He  then  pro 
ceeds : 

Where  is  the  nation  that  has  pronounced  a  state  of  servitude  for  life 
contrary  to  natural  justice  ?  What  age,  before  our  own,  could  point  to 
moralists  that  proclaim  it  an  offence  against  nature  to  hold  slaves  in  the 
condition  in  which  Providence  has  placed  them.  *  *  *  If  slavery 
has,  in  fact,  existed  among  most  nations ;  if  no  nation  has  proclaimed 
it  a  violation  of  natural  justice  ;  and  if  the  most  eminent  men  of  all 
times,  legislators,  sages,  and  moralists,  have  confessed  a  state  of  servi 
tude  for  life,  no  matter  what  name  they  have  given  it,  to  be  consistent 
with  justice,  then  we  have,  to  this  extent,  the  consent  of  mankind  in  its 
favor ;  and  from  this  consent  we  are  entitled  to  infer,  not  indeed  its 
expediency  in  every  country  and  every  state  of  society,  but  its  agree 
ment  with,  or  non-repugnance  to,  the  Law  of  Nature. 

And  he  proceeds  to  defend  "  American  Slavery"  on  the 
ground  that  it  is  in  "agreement  with"  this  law. 

SLAVERY   AGAINST   NATURE. CODE    OF   JUSTINIAN. 

Over  against  this  broad  claim,  we  put  the  declarations 
of  the  Justinian  Code,  which  will  be  admitted  to  be  con 
clusive  upon  the  point  in  hand.  We  need  scarcely  say, 
that  philosophers,  statesmen,  moralists,  accord  to  it  the 
highest  authority.  From  the  Institutes  of  Justinian,  we 
take  the  following : 

Concerning  the  rights  of  persons,  Title  3. — The  first  division  of  persons  in 
regard  to  their  rights  is  this:  that  all  men  are  either  freemen  or  slaves. 
Freedom  (from  which  men  are  called  free)  is  the  natural  power  which 
one  has  of  doing  what  he  pleases,  unless  prevented  by  force,  or  by  law. 
Slavery  is  when  one  person  is  subjected  to  the  dominion  of  another  by 
authority  of  the  law  of  nations,  CONTRARY  TO  NATURAL  LAW.  Slaves 
23 


516  SLAVERY    IN   POLEMICS. LAW    OF    NATURE. 

are  so  denominatad,  because  our  commanders  were  accustomed  to  sell, 
and  thus  to  preserve  instead  of  slaying  them.* 

So,  also,  in  the  Pandects  or  Digests,  Lib.  50,  Tit.  17, 
Sec.  32,  the  same  doctrine  is  laid  down,  that  slavery  is 
contrary  to  the  Law  of  Nature : 

In  regard  to  the  Civil  Law,  slaves  are  not  reckoned  as  persons  ;  but 
it  is  not  so  according  to  Natural  Laiv,  for  according  to  that  law,  ALL  MEN 

ARE   EQUAL,  f 

It  seems  that  the  doctrine  upon  human  rights  laid  down 
in  the  Declaration  of  Independence  as  among  "  self-evi 
dent"  truths, — "  that  all  men  are  created  equal,"  taken  in 
the  true  sense  there  intended, — was  older  than  the  days 
of  Thomas  Jefferson.  It  appears,  too,  that  slavery  is  con 
trary  to  the  Law  of  Nature, — "  contra  naturam,"  against 
nature, — instead  of  being  in  "  agreement  with"  it,  as  Dr. 
Seabury  asserts,  provided  we  take  as  our  guide  authorities 
which  are  regarded  as  among  the  highest  in  the  world. 
But  the  advocates  of  "American  Slavery"  cannot  be 
turned  aside  by  such  slight  obstacles  as  the  Institutes  of 
Justinian,  even  when  their  appeal  is  made  to  a  principle 
which  such  an  authority,  if  any,  is  deemed  competent  to 
settle. 

THE    JUSTINIAN    CODE    OVERTHROWN. 

Dr.  Seabury  is  of  course  aware  that  the  Justinian  Code 
contradicts  his  position,  and  he  labors  to  avoid  its  force. 
He  concedes  that  it  is  u  a  great  authority  on  a  subject  of 

*  "  De  Jure  personarum,  Tit.  3. — Suinma  itaque  divisio  de  jure  personarum  hnec 
est:  quod  omnes  homines,  aut  liberi  sunt,  aut  servi.  Et  libertas  quidem  (ex  qua 
etiam  liberi  vocantur)  est  natnralis  facultas  ejus,  qnod  cuique  facere  lihot,  nisi  quid 
vi  aut  jure  prohibetur.  Servitus  autetn  est  constitutio  juris  gentium,  qua  quis 
dominio  alieno  contra  naturam  subjicitur.  Servi  autem  ex  eo  appellati  sunt,  quod 
imperatores  captivas  vendere,  ac  per  hoc  servare,  nee  occidere  solent."1 

t"Quod  attinet  ad  jus  civile,  servi  pro  nullis  habentur;  non  tarnen  et  jure 
natural),  quia  quod  ad  jus  naturali  attinet  omnes  homines  sequales  sunt  v 


THE    JUSTINIAN    CODE    OVERTHROWN.  5 1*7 

this  sort ;"  speaks  of  it  as  "  a  code  which  it  took  ceDturies 
mature,"  and  in  reference  to  the  Law  of  Nature,  says 

at  this  code  "is  one  of  the  ablest  developments  of  its 
principles  ever  made  by  unassisted  reason ;"  and  admits 
that  it  "  declares  slavery  to  be  an  abnormal  state  of  society, 
upheld  by  force,  and  in  violation  of  justice."  How,  then, 
does  he  reconcile  the  Justinian  Code  with  his  own  posi 
tion  ?  Or,  rather,  how  does  he  seek  to  invalidate  its  au 
thority  ? — for  that  is  really  what  he  undertakes  to  do, 
after  giving  it  such  high  praise.  The  task  is  most  easily 
accomplished,  and  the  resort  is  eminently  worthy  of  a 
philosopher.  He  thinks  it  "just  possible"  that  we  "im 
pute  to  the  code  a  flagrant  inconsistency." 

He  first  brings  against  this  code,  hoary  with  that  wis 
dom  "  which  it  took  centuries  to  mature,"  the  charge  that 
its  definition  of  the  Law  of  Nature  is  "  different  from  that 
in  which  the  phrase  is  commonly  taken ;"  that  is,  "  differ 
ent"  from  his  own  definition.  This  ought  not  to  disturb 
our  equanimity.  We  should  freely  allow  any  man  to 
prefer  his  own  wisdom  if  he  likes,  even  though  it  should 
clash  with  that  which  it  took  "  centuries  to  mature."  We 
have  seen,  however,  that  his  own  definition  has  elements 
palpably  irreconcilable  Avith  notorious  f-icts.  But  that  is  a 
small  matter.  It  is,  so  far,  mere  criticism,  and  that  is 
within  the  capacity  of  any  one,  even  upon  the  Justinian 
Code.  The  great  philosophical  feat  is  yet  to  come. 

He  gives  the  observations  of  the  Code  upon  the  Law  of 
Nature,  as  embracing  and  illustrated  by  the  law  of  pro 
creation,  which  appertains  to  "  all  animals,  whether  they 
are  produced  on  the  earth,  in  the  air,  or  in  the  waters ;" 
and  which  says  that  "  the  rest  of  the  animal  creation"  as 
well  as  man,  have  a  "knowledge  of  this  law  by  which 
they  are  actuated ;"  and  then  the  learned  commentator 
upon  Justinian  proceeds  to  say  : 


518  SLAVERY    IN    POLEMICS. LAW    OF    XATURE. 

Now  by  the  Law  of  Nature,  in  this  large  sense  of  the  phrase,  man 
is  as  free  as  the  beasts  of  the  field ;  and  to  say  that  slavery  is  against 
Nature,  or  the  Law  of  Nature,  in  this  sense,  is  merely  to  say  that  no 
precedent  or  analogy  could  then  be  drawn  in  favor  of  slavery  from  the 
brute  creation.  I  say,  could  then  be  drawn  in  favor  of  slavery  ;  for  the 
ancients  were  undoubtedly  ignorant  of  the  astonishing  facts  which 
modern  naturalists  have  brought  to  light  in  respect  to  a  certain  species 
of  ants ;  and  which,  if  then  known,  would  have  restrained  them  from 
saying  that  slavery  was  contrary  to  Nature,  even  in  Ulpian's  sense  of 
the  word.  But  they  were  ignorant  of  these  curious  facts,  and  they 
pronounced  slavery  contrary  to  Nature,  on  the  supposition  that  no 
precedent  or  analogy  in  its  favor  could  be  drawn  from  the  brute 
creation. 

SLAVERY   FROM   AN    ANT-HILL. 

"What,  now,  are  these  "  curious  facts"  about  "a  certain 
species  of  ants,"  which  are  to  demonstrate,  in  spite  of  the 
Justinian  Code,  that  "American  Slavery  is  justified  by  the 
Law  of  Nature  ?"  Tlfe  good  Doctor  does  not  leave  us  in 
distress  long.  Like  a  skilful  physician  he  comes  to  our 
relief;  and  here  is  the  unfailing  specific: 

Among  facts,  all  of  which  are  wonderful,  not  the  least  remarkable 
and  instructive  is,  the  mutual  good- will  and  affection  which  prevail 
between  the  negro  ants  and  their  masters ;  and  that,  too,  maugre  the  fact 
that  the  relation  had  its  origin  in  hostility  and  violence. 

There  it  is  ! — "  American  Slavery"  resting  on  an  ant 
hill  !  Not  so  bad,  either  ;  for  "  the  logic  of  events"  helps 
that  of  Dr.  Seabury,  in  revealing  that  its  foundations,  just 
now,  are  a  little  porous. 

Who  shall  dispute  hereafter  that  this  is  an  age  of 
progress  ?  The  great  Southern  statesman,  Mr.  Stephens, 
builds  a  new  empire  on  a  foundation  whose  "corner-stone" 
is  slavery  ;  and  he  boasts  that  no  nation  was  ever  so  built 
before.  At  this  bold  announcement  the  world  stood 
aghast.  And  now,  this  great  New  York  Doctor  tells  us 


ANT-SLAVERY. STRIKING    ANALOGIES.  519 

what  this  "  corner-stone"  rests  upon — an  ANT-HILL.  And 
the  True  Presbyterian  commends  to  the  good  people  of 
Kentucky,  in  several  successive  issues  of  the  paper,  the 
Doctor's  book  as  being  very  able,  and  as  putting  the  de 
fence  of  slavery  "  on  grounds  distinct  from  any  yet  pre 
sented"  in  their  columns.  We  see  wherein  the  distinction 
lies.  We  have  failed  to  discover,  however,  that  the  paper 
has  exhibited  the  Ant-hill  doctrine.  As  this  is  one  of  the 
most  "distinct  grounds"  on  which  the  Doctor  "justifies 
slavery,"  we  recommend  its  insertion. 

ANT-SLAVERY. STRIKING    ANALOGIES. 

This  feature  of  the  defence  of  the  negro  slavery  of  the 
South  is  altogether  so  rich  and  instructive,  that  we  must 
give  a  further  extract  from  Dr.  Seabury  upon  yl;?£-slavery. 
He  quotes  joyously  from,  a  work  on  Natural  History,  thus, 
where  the  author  is  speaking  of  the  habits  of  certain 
species  of  ants : 

It  is  both  warlike  and  powerful,  and,  unlike  the  rest  of  the  tribe,  its 
habits  are  far  from  being  industrious.  Enough  has  been  said  to  show 
that  the  proceedings  of  some  insects  so  nearly  resemble  human  actions, 
as  to  excite  our  greatest  wonder :  but  the  habits  of  the  legionary  ant 
are  still  more  surprising  than  the  proceeding  of  the  chiefs  which  we 
have  just  described.  It  is  actually  found  to  be  a  slave-dealer,  attacking 
the  nests  of  other  species,  stealing  their  young,  rearing  them,  and  thus, 
by  shifting  all  the  domestic  duties  of  their  republic  on  strangers,  escaping 
from  labor  themselves.  This  curious  fact,  first  discovered  by  Huber, 
has  been  confirmed  by  Latreille,  and  is  admitted  by  all  naturalists 
The  slave  is  distinguished  from  its  master  by  being  of  a  dark  ash-color^ 
so  as  to  be  entitled  to  the  name  of  Negro — an  epithet  now  appropriated 
to  the  Formica  fusca,  or  ash-colored  ants.  Their  masters  are  light  in  color 
The  negro  is  an  industrious,  peaceable,  stingless  insect ;  the  legionary,  $ 
courageous,  armed,  and  lazy  oue. 

Here  is  a  pretty  striking  analogy,  it  must  be  admitted 
between  the  "  habits"  of  one  of  the  two  classes  of  ants, 


520  SLAVERY    IN    POLEMICS. LAW    OF    NATURE. 

and  certain  Southern  masters — "far  from  being  indus 
trious;"  "slave-dealers;"  "escaping  from  labor  them 
selves;"  "warlike,  courageous,  armed,  and  lazy."  Pretty 
good. 

SLAVE-TRADE    JUSTIFIED. 

It  will  be  seen,  also,  that  not  only  is  "  American  slavery" 
here  "justified,"  but  all  its  concomitants  are  sanctioned  in 
the  same  manner.  Both  the  foreign  and  domestic  slave- 
trade  is  carried  on  by  these  ants.  The  master  tribe  are 
represented  as  "  attacking  the  nests  of  other  species,  steal 
ing  their  young,  rearing  them,"  and  thus  having  "  servants" 
of  their  own.  This  is  precisely  the  way  slavery  began  in 
our  country — "  stealing"  men,  women,  and  children,  from 
Africa.  We  presume,  therefore,  that  Dr.  Seabury  and  his 
warm  admirer  and  patron,  the  True  Presbyterian,  go  in 
for  reopening  the  African  slave-trade, — which,  also,  the 
leading  rebels  of  the  South  were  in  favor  of, — justifying  it 
upon  the  "  Law  of  Nature ;"  that  is,  the  proceedings  about 
an  Ant-hill  We  shall  not  lack  for  a  definition  of  that 
controverted  phrase  hereafter. 

But  there  is  more  in  an  Ant-hill  than  at  first  appears — 
when  stirred  up  a  little ;  and  especially  in  this  one.  How 
does  Dr.  Seabury  know,  that  which  he  so  confidently  as 
sumes,  that  the  Justinian  Code  can  be  so  easily  overthrown 
by  a  tribe  of  ants  ?  How  does  he  know  that  "  the  ancients 
were  undoubtedly  ignorant"  of  ant-wars  and  ant-slavery  ? 
Does  he  presume  they  never  saw  an  Ant-hill  ?  They 
knew  a  great  deal  more  than  has  come  down  to  us 
in  books.  His  reasoning,  even  should  we  allow  it  any 
value,  is  wholly  built  on  his  own  ignorance  rather  than 
upon  theirs.  He  argues  from  a  negative  premise.  If  he 
is  so  confident  they  did  not  know  these  things,  let  him 
show  the  evidence  of  it.  If  he  is  so  sure  of  their  ignorance, 
let  him  relieve  his  own.  This  is  certainly  incumbent  on 


ITS    PRACTICAL    ADVANTAGES.  521 

him,  when  he  is  arguing  for  the  perpetual  bondage  of 
human  millions  from  the  quarrels  of  an  Ant-hill.  But  it  is 
of  very  small  moment  whether  "  the  ancients"  were  "  igno 
rant"  in  this  matter  or  not.  The  Justinian  Code  is  likely 
to  survive  this  assault. 

CANNIBALISM    JUSTIFIED    ON     SIMILAR    GROUND. 

This  hill,  is  as  pregnant  of  conclusions  as  of  ants.  If  the 
"habits"  of  the  lower  species  of  animals  are  to  be  a  guide 
to  man  in  his  moral  relations,  they  may  justify  many  other 
things  besides  negro  slavery.  If  the  Law  of  Nature,  on 
this  ground,  sanctions  slavery,  it  also  sanctions  cannibal 
ism.  Did  the  good  Doctor  never  hear  of  animals  devour 
ing  each  other  ?  Fishes  live  upon  fishes ;  insects  upon 
insects ;  and  the  various  tribes  of  carnivorous  animals  live 
upon  each  other.  May  mankind  then  eat  one  another? 
If  it  be  said  that  no  animal  ever  devours  one  of  precisely 
the  same  species,  we  should  demand  proof,  as  upon  the 
proposition  that  "  the  ancients"  never  saw  an  Ant-hill.  As 
it  is  a  negative  proposition,  it  would  require  a  larger 
amount  of  evidence  than  the  Doctor  may  be  able  to  give. 
But  we  waive  that.  Even  though  it  were  true,  that  the 
carnivorous  animals  eat  other  species  only  than  their  own, 
— of  the  contrary  of  which  we  have  had  ocular  demon 
stration, — we  could  get  along  with  that  difficulty  very 
easily.  The  Anglo-Saxon  need  only  eat  the  negro.  Some 
wise  men  make  them  of  a  different  race  entirely ;  others 
say  that  they  are  at  least  of  a  different  species  of  the  genus 
homo.  The  case  then  is  clear.  Cannibalism  is  established 
upon  the  Law  of  Nature. 

ITS    PRACTICAL    ADVANTAGES. 

Besides  this  solid  foundation  for  cannibalism,  it  has  its 
practical  illustrations  and  its  advantages  in  certain  cases. 


522  SLAVERY    IX    POLEMICS. LAW    OF    NATURE. 

The  examples  become  less  numerous  as  Christianity  ad 
vances,  but  that  is  no  matter ;  the  Gospel  of  the  Law  of 
Nature  is  older  than  the  Christian  era.  We  can  follow 
the  New  Zealanders  and  the  Feejees,  and  can  instruct 
modern  missionaries  to  re-establish  their  ancient  aud  well- 
observed  customs. 

And  then,  this  might  be  a  serviceable  argument  among 
the  rebels.  It  is  said  they  are  scarce  of  food.  If  the 
Doctor's  book  is  among  them,  as  is  most  likely,  we  think 
they  will  see  that  upon  his  premises  they  might  serve  up 
their  fat  negroes  as  meat  for  their  armies.  If  "  necessity 
is  the  mother  of  invention,"  they  may  do  it  without  his 
aid.  And  it  may  be  well,  too,  as  a  measure  of  safety  ;  for 
if  they  do  not  eat  their  negroes,  the  negroes  will  be  very 
apt  to  devour  them  ;  and,  in  either  case,  we  do  not  see  but 
the  Law  of  Nature  would  be  equally  well  and  profitably 
illustrated. 

But  seriously, — and  in  fact  we  have  been  serious  all 
along, — is  it  not  a  sorry  sight,  to  bthold  a  grave  divine  of 
the  metropolitan  city  of  New  York,  at  this  time  of  day, 
dealing  out  such  stuifto  a  sensible  people,  for  the  "justifi 
cation  of  American  Slavery  by  the  Law  of  Nature;"  help 
ing  thus,  by  the  silliest  of  all  imaginings,  to  prop  up  a 
tottering  system  of  human  bondage  that  has  plunged  his 
country  into  a  bloody  war  which  is  slaying  by  myriads 
both  bondmen  and  freemen !  And  is  the  sight  any  less 
humiliating,  to  see  a  Presbyterian  newspaper,  claiming  to 
be  "  religious,"  attempting,  week  after  week,  to  enlighten 
the  benighted  people  of  Kentucky,  in  the  year  of  grace 
1864,  by  commending  such  a  work  to  them  in  the  highest 
terms  of  approval  ?  If  any  thing  can  exceed  the  infatuation 
of  rebel  politicians  and  their  coadjutors  in  the  South,  in 
attempting  to  overthrow  their  Government  by  armed 
rebellion,  it  is  the  infatuation  of  rebel  sympathizers,  ex- 


523 

hibited  in  such  feats  of  literary  accomplishment  as  the  one 
here  noticed,  and  many  more  like  it.* 


A  similar  view  may  be  taken  of  the  argument  of  Dr. 
Thorn  well,  about  slavery  being  justified  by  nature,  as  found 
in  the  "  Confederate  General  Assembly's"  Address  to  the 
Christian  world,  and  in  the  Southern  Presbyterian  Heview, 
extracts  from  both  of  which  we  have  given. 

In  the  former,  he  says :  "  Whatever  is  universal,  is 
natural.  We  are  willing  that  slavery  should  be  tried  by 
this  standard."  Let  us  then  apply  the  test.  Sin  is  "uni 
versal"  among  men.  Is  ity  therefore,  "natural;"  that  is, 
right,  justifiable  ? 

But  here  is  more  logic  of  the  sa*me  sort.  Dr.  Thorn- 
well  proceeds :  "  We  are  willing  to  abide  by  the  testimony 
of  the  race,  and  if  man,  as  man,  has  everywhere  con 
demned  it ;  if  all  human  laws  have  prohibited  it  as  crime; 
if  it  stands  in  the  same  category  with  malice,  murder, 
and  theft,  then  we  are  willing,  in  the  name  of  humanity, 
to  renounce  it,  and  to  renounce  it  forever." 

Here  is  a  carefully  framed  sophism  which  spoils  the 
whole  argument.  It  takes  a  good  logician  to  be  a  good 
sophist,  and  Dr.  Thornwell  was  the  former  when  he  chose 

*  General  Cobb  declares,  that  "even  learned  judges  in  slaveholding  States,  adopt 
ing  the  language  of  Lord  Mansfield,  in  Somerset's  case,  have  announced,  in  judicial 
decisions,  that '  slavery  is  contrary  to  the  law  of  nature."1  "  He  refers  to  such  deci 
sions  as  found  in  the  reports  of  Southern  courts.  He  remarks  upon  the  point,  as 
follows:  "The  course  of  reasoning,  by  which  this  conclusion  is  attained,  is  very 
much  this:  That  in  a  state  of  nature  all  men  are  free.  That  one  man  is  at  birth 
entitled  by  nature  to  no  higher  rights  and  privileges  than  another,  nor  does  nature 
specify  any  particular  time  or  circumstances  under  which  the  one  shall  begin  to 
rule  and  the  other  to  obey.  Hence,  by  the  law  of  nature,  no  man  is  the  slave  of 
another,  and  hence  all  slavery  is  contrary  to  the  law  of  nature.  While  "learned 
judges  in  shareholding  States"  thus  judicially  announced,  years  ago,  this  doctrine, 
"learned'"  divines  in  Ticm-slaveholding  States,  in  a  time  of  rebellion  and  war  in  be 
half  of  slavery,  are  trying  to  prop  it  up  by  every  possible  means;  by  nature,  revela 
tion,  and  all  other  "aid  and  comfort'  they  can  give  to  rebels  in  arms! 

23* 


524  SLAVERY    IX   POLEMICS. LAW    OF    NATURE. 

to  be.  His  reasoning  here  is  based  upon  an  assumption, 
and  one  which  is  notoriously  contrary  to  fact.  Have  nun 
universally  reprobated  the  crimes  which  he  specifies? 
Have  "  all  human  laws  prohibited"  each  one  in  the  cata 
logue  ?  Did  the  laws  of  Sparta,  for  example,  prohibit 
and  punish  "  theft,"  or  rather  its  detection  ?  Were  not 
many  things  sanctioned  there  by  law,  even  under  the 
teaching  of  their  great  lawgiver,  Lycurgus,  which  are 
now  reprobated? — when,  "to  teach  the  youth  of  Lacedae- 
nion  cunning,  vigilance,  and  activity,  they  were  encouraged 
to  practise  theft  in  certain  cases ;  but  if  detected,  they 
were  flogged,  or  obliged  to  go  without  food,  or  compelled 
to  dance  round  an  altar,  singing  songs  in  ridicule  of  them 
selves." 

Have  "  all  human  laws  prohibited"  all  other  crimes 
which  are  now  upon  the  statute-books  of  enlightened 
States  ?  Nobody  will  pretend  this.  What  then  does  the 
argument  amount  to,  based  upon  universal  condemnation 
of  specified  crimes,  when  no  such  condemnation  exists  ? 
Suppose  then  slavery  has  not  been  universally  condemned 
among  nations;  neither  has  "theft;"  nor  has  "  murder," 
in  all  the  degrees  and  phases  of  that  crime  in  which  it  is 
now  condemned  by  Christian  States.  This  argument,  then, 
amounts  to  just  nothing  at  all.  It  is  a  skilfully  framed 
sophism,  and  nothing  more ;  and  Dr.  Thornwell  was  al 
ways  skilful.* 

*  If  there  is  any  thing  of  special  value  in  the  legislation  of  ancient  Pagan  nations 
as  an  example  for  a  Christian  people,  take  the  following,  as  one  among  a  thousand 
cases,  from  one  of  the  greatest  lawgivers  of  antiquity.  It  was  one  of  the  "peculiar 
institutions"1  of  Sparta:  "A  singular  custom  was  the  flogging  of  boys  (di(tma$- 
tigosiis),  on  the  annual  festival  of  Diana  Orthia,  for  the  purpose  of  inuring  them  to 
bear  pain  with  firmness.  The  priestess  stood  by  with  a  small,  light,  wooden  image 
of  Diana,  and  if  she  observed  that  any  boy  was  spared,  she  called  out  that  the  image 
of  the  goddess  was  so  heavy  that  she  could  not  support  it,  and  the  blows  were  then 
redoubled.  The  men  who  were  present  exhorted  their  sons  to  fortitude;  while  the 
boys  endeavored  to  surpass  each  other  in  firmness.  Whoever  uttered  the  least  cry 
during  the  scourging,  which  was  so  severe  as  sometimes  to  prove  fatal,  was  consul- 


PAGAN   AN    EXAMPLE     FOR-CIIRISTIAN    STATES.        525 


PAGAN   AN   EXAMPLE    FOR   CHRISTIAN   STATES. 

But  wiaving  all  this,  and  admitting  the  assumption  to 
be  true, — of,  even  admitting  the  implied  affirmative  as 
sumption,  that  slavery  has  been  universally  approved 
.'imong  nations;  admitting,  as  the  True  Presbyterian  says, 
that  "the  Persians,  the  Greeks,  the  Romans,  the  Gauls, 
the  Saxons,  the  Normans,  all  held  slaves," — is  not  this  a 
most  humiliating  exhibition  for  Christian  men  to  make? — 
to  appeal  to  the  Pagan  States  of  antiquity  for  an  example 
to  guide  Christian  States  and  Christian  men,  at  this  time 
of  day,  in  their  highest  moral  duties  towards  their  fellow- 
men? 

Has  the  Gospel  produced  so  little  effect  in  our  day,  and 
in  our  country,  that  its  TEACHERS  must  go  back  two  thou 
sand  years  to  Paganism  for  a  guide  in  ethics  where  the 
most  important  interests  of  humanity  are  involved  ? — that 
they  must  seek  shelter  from  the  scorn  of  men,  for  slavery, 
in  those  Pagan  States  which  have  long  since  been  purged 
of  slavery,  and  this  too  by  the  influence  of  that  very 
Christianity  which  they  preach  and  profess  to  exemplify 
as  a  light  and  a  guide  for  all  mankind  ?  Oh,  shame,  where 
is  thy  blush ! 

There  is  another  aspect  of  the  case  presented  by  Dr. 
Thornwell  which  deserves  notice.  Leaving  the  negative, 
he  turns  to  the  positive  view  of  the  subject,  and  immedi 
ately  following  what  we  have  given  above,  triumphantly 
adds:  "But  what  if  the  overwhelming  majority  of  man 
kind  have  approved  it ;  what  if  philosophers  and  states 
men  have  justified  it,  and  the  laws  of  all  nations  acknowl 
edged  it,"  etc.  ?  We  have  already  met  this  in  part,  but  it 
claims  a  word  or  two  more. 

ered  aa  disgraced,  while  he  who  bore  it  without  shrinking  was  crowned,  and  received 
the  praises  of 'the  whole  city." 


526    .  SLAVERY  IN  POLEMICS. LAW  OF  NATURE. 


SLAVERY  SUBMITTED  TO  A  POPULAR  VOTE. 

How  easily  he  here  slides  from  what  just  before  was 
assumed  to  be  the  "  universal,"  to  what  he  is  now  content 
with  calling  a  "  majority !"  Suppose  we  admit  that  "  the 
overwhelming  majority  of  mankind  have  approved"  of 
slavery,  does  that  settle  any  thing  about  the  right  of  the 
case?  Are  mankind  always  right  in  their  judgments? 
"  What  if  philosophers  and  statesmen  have  justified  it ;" 
what  then  ?  Are  they  infallible  ?  Is  not  the  whole  race 
in  sin, — as  this  distinguished  theologian  held, — with  judg 
ment,  heart,  conscience,  biased  to  evil?  And  do  we  not 
all  recognize  the  fact  that  men  may  and  do  change  their 
opinions ;  that  the  world  may  improve  in  its  moral  judg 
ments,  and  that  it  is  doing  so  daily  upon  a  thousand  ques 
tions  hoary  with  age  ? 

But  is  this  representation  true  in  point  of  fact  ?  Can 
any  one  for  a  moment  suppose  that  "  the  overwhelming 
majority  of  mankind  approved"  of  slavery,  at  the  time  the 
Justinian  Code  was  promulgated? — a  code  containing  the 
"matured  wisdom  of  centuries?" — a  code  which  pro 
nounced  slavery  to  be  "  against  nature" — contra  naturam  f 
This  claimed  approval  of  a  former  day  is  untrue  in  point 
of  fact ;  and  if  it  were  true,  it  would  establish  nothing  to 
the  purpose  upon  the  question  of  moral  right. 

But  if  this  question  is  to  be  settled  by  the  voice  of  a 
popular  "  majority," — rather  a  singular  tribunal  for  Dr. 
Thornwell  to  erect  to  decide  a  moral  question,  and  still 
more  singular  for  the  "  Confederate  General  Assembly  of 
the  Presbyterian  Church"  to  propose  for  the  determina 
tion  of  any  question,  while  they  have  joined  their  fellow- 
citizens  in  rebellion  against  the  constitutionally  expressed 
will  of  the  whole  American  people, — but  if  this  is  the 
tribunal,  the  voice  of  the  "majority,"  suppose  we  take  a 


AMERICAN   SLAVERY   FOUNDED    ON    HUMAN   LAW.    527 

vote  to-day  •  what  would  be  the  decision  upon  slavery  ? 
Suppose  we  submit  it,  at  the  present  moment,  to  a  vote  of 
the  whole  civilized  world  ?  Would^the  advocates  of  negro 
slavery  be  willing  to  abide  the  result  ?  For  our  part,  we 
certainly  would.  If,  then,  it  is  to  be  determined  by  a 
popular  "  majority,"  we  propose  it  to  all  civilized  and 
Christian  States  and  Christian  people,  Anno  Domini 
1864. 

THE    INEVITABLE    CONCLUSION. 

We  can  not  pursue  the  subject  further,  of  the  relation 
of  slavery  to  the  Law  of  Nature.  One  of  the  very  highest 
authorities  on  this  point,  the  Code  of  Justinian,  settles  the 
question  satisfactorily.  We  do  not  think  such  philoso 
phers  as  Dr.  Seabury,  nor  even  such  logicians  as  Dr. 
Thornwell,  writing  an  Address  for  the  "  General  Assem 
bly  of  the  Confederate  States,"  will  overthrow  the  position 
of  that  code,  that  slavery  is  "contra  naturam,"  without 
more  successful  efforts  than  they  have  yet  made.  The 
Law  of  Nature  does  not  sustain  the  system  ;  but  its  great 
est  expounder  positively  condemns  it. 

Nor  are  the  arguments  any  more  conclusive  which 
attempt  to  sanction  the  negro  slavery  of  the  South  by  an 
appeal  to  the  word  of  God.  That  system  is  wholly  desti-. 
tute  of  the  positive  "  commands"  and  "  ordinances"  by 
which  the  Old  Testament  system  of  Jewish  servitude  was 
regulated  ;  and  when  the  attempt  is  made  to  justify  it  by 
the  "matrimonial  and  parental  relations"  in  connection 
with  which  it  is  mentioned  in  the  New  Testament,  the 
effort  is  involved  in  inextricable  absurdities. 

AMEKICAN    SLAVERY    FOUNDED    ON    HUMAN    LAW. 

But  passing  both  these,  we  maintain  that  the  only  foun 
dation  on  which  American  negro  slavery  rests,  with  any 


528  SLAVERY   IN   POLEMICS. — LAW    OF   NATURE. 

show  of  legal  right  in  the  institution  which  is  even  plau 
sible,  is  that  of  human  law.  Dr.  Thornwell  elaborately 
argues  against  this,  in  quotations  before  given.  He  says : 
"  It  has  been  contended  that  the  right  of  property  in  slaves 
is  the  creature  of  positive  statute,  and,  consequently,  of 
force  only  within  the  jurisdiction  of  the  law."  Against 
this  position  he  arrays  himself.  His  proofs,  however,  are 
mere  dicta,  and  his  reasonings  fallacious.  That  we  may 
be  seen  to  do  his  argument  justice,  we  refer  the  reader  to 
a  previous  page  where  it  is  given  at  length.  We  can  here 
only  notice  it  briefly.  He  says  in  opposition  to  the  doc 
trine  which  he  recites  above,  the  italics  being  his  own : 

Slavery  has  never,  in  any  country,  so  far  as  wo  know,  arisen  under 
the  operation  of  statute  law.  *  *  *  Law  defines,  modifies,  and 
regulates  it,  as  it  does  every  other  species  of  property,  but  law  never 
created  it.  *  *  *  The  point  is,  whether  the  law  made  slavery — 
whether  it  is  the  police  regulation  of  limited  localities,  or  whether  it  is 
a  property  founded  in  natural  causes,  and  causes  of  universal  operation. 

CONFLICTING    AUTHORITIES. LAW   VERSUS    DIVINITY. 

Dr.  Baird,  in  his  "  Southern  Rights  and  Northern 
Duties,"  takes  both  sides  of  this  question.  This  will  allow 
him  to  defend  whichever  side  may  be  attacked.  Speak 
ing  of  one  of  the  planks  in  the  Chicago  platform  of  1860, 
he  avers  that  slavery  is  the  creature  of  positive  law,  as 
follows : 

Nay,  further,  this  declaration  pronounces  unconstitutional  the  laws  by 
which  slavery  acquired  EXISTENCE  in  eight  of  the  Southern  States — all 
those  which  have  passed  through  a  territorial  condition. — p.  9. 

He  then  takes  the  other  side,  denying  that  slavery  is  the 
creature  of  positive  law,  as  follows  : 

So  far  is  it  from  being  true,  as  commonly  assumed,  that  slavery  was 
nriainated  and  now  exists  in  the  States  by  virtue  of  special  local  statute, 


CONFLICTING    AUTHORITIES.  529 

such  statute  is  probably  nowhere  to  be  found  in  the  laws  of  any  people 
except  Israel.  Certainly  there  never  was  a  law  passed  in  any  State  of 
the  Union,  whether  prior  to  or  since  the  Revolution,  establishing 
slavery.* — p.  18. 

When  Doctors  of  Divinity  disagree  upon  law,  as  Drs. 
Thornwell  and  Baird  here  do,  and  the  latter  with  himself, 
it  is  well  to  see  what  certain  Doctors  of  Law  say  upon  the 
point.  We  will  detain  the  reader  with  but  two  examples 
out  of  many. 

Daniel  Webster  is  conceded  to  have  been  among  the 
ablest,  if  not  decidedly  the  ablest,  constitutional  lawyer  of 
the  country,  well  called  the  "  Defender  of  the  Constitution." 
He  dissents  from  both  the  points  made  by  both  these 
Divinity  Doctors,  regarding  the  constitutional  right  to 
slavery  in  the  Territories,  and  the  existence  of  slavery  by 
positive  law.  In  his  speech  in  the  United  States  Senate, 
in  1848,  on  the  "  exclusion  of  slavery  from  the  Territories," 
alluding  to  the  Southern  States,  he  says  : 

They  have  a  system  of  local  legislation  on  which  slavery  rests  /  while 
everybody  agrees  that  it  is  against  natural  law,  or  at  least  against  the 
common  understanding  which  prevails  among  men  as  to  what  is  natural 
law.  *  *  *  I  do  not  intend  to  deny  the  validity  of  that  local  law, 
where  it  is  established ;  but  I  say  it  is,  after  all,  local  law. 

Chief- Justice  Shaw,  of  Massachusetts,  gives  his  opinion 
in  a  judicial  decision,  as  follows: 

Slavery  being  odious,  and  against  natural  right,  cannot  exist  except 
by  the  force  of  positive  law.  *  *  *  Each  State  may,  for  its  own 
convenience,  declare  that  slaves  shall  be  deemed  property,  and  the  laws 
of  personal  chattels  shall  be  deemed  to  apply  to  them ;  as,  for  instance, 
that  they  may  be  bought  and  sold,  delivered,  attached,  and  levied  upon; 
that  trespass  will  lie  for  an  injury  done  to  them,  or  trover  for  converting 

*  Dr.  Baird  is  "certainly"  mistaken.  In  the  State  of  Georgia,  at  least,  slavery 
originated  in  the  very  way  he  denies, — through  "a  law  passed"  "establishing 
fclavery."  Gen.  Cobb  says:  "With  the  exception  of  Georgia,  where  it  was  at  first 
prohibited,  no  law  is  found  on  our  statute  books  authorizing  its  introduction." — 
Law  of  Negro  Slavery. 


530  SLAYERY    IN    POLEMICS. LAW    OF    NATURE. 

them.  *  *  *  If  a  note  of  hand  made  in  New  Orleans  were  sued  on 
here,  and  the  defence  should  be  made  that  it  was  a  bad  consideration, 
or  without  consideration,  because  given  for  the  price  of  a  slave  sold,  it 
may  well  be  admitted  that  such  a  defence  could  not  prevail ;  because 
the  contract  was  a  legal  one  by  the  law  of  the  place  where  it  was  made. 

Thus  Law  versus  Divinity,  stands  under  the  authority 
of  great  names  on  both  sides. 

ORIGIN    OF    NEGRO    SLAYERY    IN   THE    UNITED    STATES. 

Whatever  may  have  been  true  of  other  systems, — as,  in 
ancient  times,  originating  in  some  countries  prior  to  legal 
recognition, — that  of  negro  slavery  in  this  country,  both 
as  a  system  and  as  involving  property  in  slaves,  did  arise 
and  has  continued  "under  the  operation  of  statute  law." 
The  origin  of  slavery  in  some  other  countries  is  so  remote 
that  it  can  be  traced  only  to  the  mists  of  the  fabulous 
ages,  and  then  it  is  very  convenient  to  assert  that  it  rests 
on  the  Law  of  Nature,  "  is  a  property  founded  in  natural 
causes,"  or  general  custom,  or  rests  on  some  other  vague 
foundation;  but  its  origin  in  this  country  is  too  recent  and 
too  well  known  to  admit  of  doubt;  and  it  will  be  borne 
in  mind  that  Dr.  Thornwell's  abstract  reasonings  are  made 
to  bear  upon  and  justify,  and  are  by  him  directly  applied 
to,  the  system  of  the  South.  The  legal  status  of  that 
system  is  coincident  with  its  origin  in  this  country : 

ITS    HISTORY    TRACED. AFRICAN    SLAYE-TRADE. 

Let  us  look  at  the  historical  facts  of  the  case.  Negro 
slavery  began  in  this  country  in  1620.  Negroes  were 
brought  from  Africa  into  Virginia,  and  there  sold  as 
slaves.  That  was  the  first  positive  connection  of  the 
system  with  what  is  now  the  United  States.  Negroes 
were  afterwards  brought,  at  different  times,  during  many 
years,  and  disposed  of  in  the  same  way.  Every  portion 


ITS    HISTOKT    TRACED. AFRICAN    SLAVE-TRADE.       531 

of  the  country  that  finally  possessed  them,  obtained  them 
in  this  manner,  or  by  purchasing  in  this  country  those 
originally  brought  from  Africa,  or  their  descendants. 
These  were  the  germs  of  the  system,  and  of  all  riyhts 
embraced  in  it,  so  far  as  it  had  a  foothold  in  the  United 
States;  and  every  slave  that  has  since  bet'ii  held  here  has 
been  held  by  a  tenure  which  had  such  an  origin. 

Now,  out  of  what  did  the  system,  thus  begun,  arise, 
and  on  what  does  it  still  legally  rest?  The  system  arose, 
in  this  country,  "under  the  operation  of"  the  African 
slave-trade ;  and  that  trade,  in  every  country  which  car 
ried  it  on  and  encouraged  it,  beginning  centuries  before 
the  introduction  of  slaves  into  Virginia,  was  legalized  by 
"  statute  law." 

It  arose  from  the  highest  civil  authority  known,  being 
legalized  by  Ferdinand  of  Spain,  in  1501  ;  by  Charles  V., 
in  1516  ;  Queen  Elizabeth  sanctioned  it  1567  ;  James  I.  in 
1618.  The  Dutch  vessel  which  brought  the  first  cargo 
of  twenty  negroes  into  James  River,  in  1620,  was  engaged 
in  the  trade  under  charter. 

The  system  which  thus  began  "under  the  operation  of 
statute  law,"  continued  to  increase  in  the  same  manner. 
Charles  I.  granted  a  charter  to  a  company  to  carry  on  the 
slave-trade  in  1631 ;  and  Charles  II.  in  1662,  at  the  head 
of  which  was  the  Duke  of  York,  the  King's  brother.  The 
Royal  African  Company  was  chartered  in  1672,  embracing 
among  its  members  the  King,  the  Duke  of  York,  arid  other 
noblemen.  In  1688,  Parliament  abolished  all  exclusive 
charters;  and  in  1698  the  slave-trade  was  thrown  open  to 
all  persons,  and  negroes  were  exported  duty  fret1. 

While  the  laws  of  England  secured  a  monopoly  to 
British  subjects  in  bringing  slaves  to  Briu.-h  Colonies, 
French  and  Portuguese  Companies,  under  author!;  y  grant  c-d 
by  Spain,  brought  them  to  the  Spanish  Colonies.  Philip  V 


532  SLAVERY    IN    POLEMICS. LAW    OF    NATURE. 

of  Spain,  and  Queen  Anne  of  England,  formed  a  treaty  to 
promote  the  trade  in  1713.  In  the  reign  of  George  II., 
1750,  it  was  declared  by  Parliament  that  "the  slave-trade 
is  very  advantageous  to  Great  Britain ;"  and  as  late  as 
1788,  Parliament  passed  acts  regulating  the  trade.  The 
French  Government  encouraged  the  trade  in  1784,  by 
paying  a  bounty  to  vessels  engaged  therein. 

Besides  all  these  foreign  charters,  the  Colonies  of  Great 
Britain  in  this  country  passed  acts  regulating  the  trade, 
and  directly  engaged  in  it  under  the  legal  authority  of  the 
mother  country. 

FOUNDED    IN    HUMAN    LAW,     OR    WITHOUT    LEGALITY. 

And  thus  it  is  as  certain  as  any  historical  facts  can 
make  any  thing  certain,  that  the  system  of  negro  slavery 
in  the  United  States  did  arise  "  under  the  operation  of 
statute  law,"  and  did  continue  to  expand  and  progress 
under  the  highest  and  most  "  positive  statutes"  of  all  the 
civilized  nations  of  the  world.  And  it  is  further  true, 
that  no  negro  was  ever  held  in  this  country,  as  a  slave, 
"  as  property,"  whose  status  as  a  slave,  and  as  "property" 
did  not  arise,  either  in  his  own  person  or  through  Ids 
ancestors,  in  just  that  manner.  And  it  is  further  true, 
that  all  the  statutes  which  have  ever  been  passed  in 
this  country  concerning  slavery,  in  any  of  the  States, 
have  tacitly  assumed  as  legal  and  authoritative  all  the 
charters  under  which  Africans  were  brought  to  this 
country  ;  and  all  the  legal  basis  for  the  system,  as  it  has 
ever  since  existed  in  this  country,  and  all  the  legal  basis 
of  property  right  in  the  slave  under  the  system,  rests 
ultimately,  so  far  as  law  in  this  country  is  concerned,  on 
the  presumed  legality  of  that  authority  under  which  the 
African  slave-trade  was  carried  on;  or,  it  originated  in 
the  local  and  positive  laws  of  the  respective  States. 


POSITIVE    LAW. INEVITABLE    CRIME. 


POSITIVE    LAW.— INEVITABLE    CRIME. 

If  any  persons  choose  to  go  beyond  the  slave-trade,  and 
push  the  subject  on  into  darkness,  to  endeavor  to  find  a 
foundation  in  "natural  causes,"  or  something  else,  for  the 
system  in  this  country,  the  case  will  not  be  benefited. 
We  say  nothing  now  of  the  moral  right  of  the  slave-trade, 
which  has  since  been  pronounced  "  piracy"  by  the  laws 
of  enlightened  nations,  and  which  of  course,  if  so  now,  was 
always  so,  in  a  moral  point  of  view, — but  if  it  was  once 
legal,  as  in  a  technical  sense  it  was,  then  it  covered  the 
whole  process  of  what  was  necessarily  embraced  in  the 
trade:  the  obtaining  of  the  negroes  in  Africa,  whether  by 
purchase,  or  by  kidnapping  them;  the  bringing  of  them 
to  this  country;  and  the  sale  of  them  to  the  subjects  of 
Great  Britain  in  the  Colonies. 

Now,  if  those  who  wish  to  escape  the  position,  that  the 
system  arose  "  under  the  operation  of  positive  statute," 
choose  to  go  into  Africa,  on  what  basis  will  they  there 
place  it?  "It  is  a  property  founded  in  natural  causes, 
and  causes  of  universal  operation,"  says  Dr.  Thorn  well. 
What  are  those  causes,  in  this  case  ?  Captures  in  war 
were  the  most  common.  We  have,  then,  visions  of  the 
most  revolting  wars  among  barbarous  tribes;  wars  ex 
pressly  undertaken  to  provide  victims  to  sell  to  the  slave- 
trader  ;  villages  sacked  and  burned,  and  large  districts  of 
country  laid  waste;  the  basest  treachery,  fraud,  and 
brutality  practised,  and  every  spectacle  at  which  humanity 
shudders.  All  this,  so  well  known  to  the  world,  is  then 
the  alternative  furnished,  by  the  facts  of  the  case,  which 
must  inevitably  be  accepted  as  the  only  basis  upon  which 
negro  slavery  in  this  country  can  rest,  either  as  a  system, 
or  as  embodying  a  property  right  in  the  slave,  the  moment 
the  theory  is  abandoned  that  both  had  their  origin  in 


534  SLAVERY    IN    POLEMICS. LAW    OP    NATURE. 

"positive  law."  If  the  advocates  of  the  system  prefer  the 
alternative,  they  are  quite  welcome  to  the  superior  satisfac 
tion  it  must  afford  them. 

POSITIVE    LAW    THEORY    SUSTAINED    BY    THE     HIGHEST    SOU 
THERN    AUTHORITY. 

General  Thomas  R.  R.  Cobb,  of  Georgia,  whom  we  have 
before  several  times  quoted,  fully  sustains  the  legal  basis 
which  we  have  laid  down  both  for  the  system  and  the  pro 
perty  right,  referring  it  to  the  "  purchase"  made  in  Africa, 
which,  as  we  have  said,  was  covered  by  the  legalized 
traffic  which  always  originated  either  in  such  "purchase," 
or  in  kidnapping  ;  and  General  Cobb  distinctly  repudiates 
the  latter  process  as  furnishing  any  "legal  claim"  whatever, 
leaving  those  who  reject  the  theory  of  "  positive  law" 
nothing,  to  stand  on.  He  says  : 

We  have  seen  in  a  preliminary  sketch  the  history  of  the  introduction 
of  negro  slavery  into  the  United  States.  The  origin  of  the  system  is 
found,  therefore,  in  purchase,  of  persons  already  in  a  state  of  slavery  in 
their  own  land.  The  law  does  not  go  back  of  that  fact,  to  inquire  into 
the  foundation  of  that  slavery  there,  but,  recognizing  the  rights  of  the 
master  there  to  sell,  sustains  the  title  of  the  purchaser  from  him.  It 
was  alleged,  and,  doubtless,  was  true,  that  the  slave-traders  sometimes 
stimulated  or  were  engaged  in  kidnapping  free  negroes  on  the  coast  of 
Africa,  who  were  afterwards  sold  as  slaves.  Such  a  foundation  could 
not  sustain  a  legal  claim  to  the  bondage  of  the  victim. 

This  work  of  General  Cobb, — "  Law  of  Negro  Slavery," 
— is  of  the  highest  legal  authority  in  the  South.  He  cites, 
in  connection  with  the  foregoing  extract,  several  judicial 
decisions  of  Southern  courts  sustaining  the  positions  taken. 
As  "kidnapping"  in  Africa  was  held  to  invalidate  the 
"legal  claim,"  one  of  these  decisions  lays  down  the  prin 
ciple  by  which  the  courts  are  governed,  that  "  the  pre 
sumption  is  in  favor  of  the  slavery  there." 


THE    IMPREGNABLE    CONCLUSION.  535 


THE   IMPREGNABLE    CONCLUSION. 

The  status  of  negro  slavery  in  the  United  States,  rests, 
therefore,  by  the  highest  legal  authorities  of  the  South, 
upon  a  different  basis  from  that  to  which  Dr.  Thorn  well 
and  others  assign  it.  It  is  unquestionably  true,  in  point 
of  fact,  that  vast  multitudes  who  have  been  held  in  slavery 
in  the  United  States,  ever  since  the  origin  of  the  system, 
have  been  held  upon  ;i  "  foundation"  which,  if  traced  back, 
"  could  not  sustain  a  legal  claim,  to  the  bondage  of  the 
victim."  Their  slavery  \vus  founded  in  "kidnapping."  It 
was,  therefore,  by  these  high  Southern  authorities,  from 
first  to  last,  illegal.  The  "•  presumption"  by  ..which  the 
courts  are  governed,  and  which  in  such  case  would,  of 
course,  be  in  favor  of  the  "  legal  claim,"  was  no  doubt  a 
principle  absolutely  necessary  to  save  the  claim  in  multi 
tudes  of  cases  ;  and  as  the  interest  of  every  master  would 
be  in  favor  of  the  "presumption,"  the  claim  would  always 
be  safe. 

General  Cobb  well  says  :  "  The  law  does  not  go  back  of 
that  fact ;"  that  is,  of  the  "  purchase  of  persons  already  in 
a  state  of  slavery  in  their  own  land."  It  is  perhaps  well, 
morally  considered,  that  it  does  not,  for,  as  before  stated, 
there  is  nothing  "back  of  that  fact"  but  force,  fraud,  trea 
chery,  crime  of  every  sort,  in  the  perpetration  of  which  the 
victims  have  been  brought  into  slavery  and  their  bondage 
perpetuated ;  and  the  same  crimes  have  entered  into  the 
traffic  by  which  some  other  systems  have  been  established. 
And  yet,  legally  considered,  there  was  no  necessary  reason 
for  stopping  even  there.  If  any  persons,  therefore,  choose 
to  "  go  back  of  that  fact"  where  Southern  courts  are  con 
tent  to  stop,  and  should  "  inquire  into  the  foundation  of 
that  slavery"  in  Africa,  they  would  still  be  obliged  to 
4k  fetch  up"  on  a  basis  of  "positive  law." 


536  SLAVERY    IN    POLEMICS. LAW    OF    NATURE. 

The  African  systems  prevailing  have  the  public  consent 
of  the  chiefs  and  of  the  tribes ;  the  usages  by  which  slavery 
is  regulated  among  them  are  settled ;  the  modes  of  redu 
cing  one  another  to  slavery,  as  for  example  by  captures  in 
war,  are  recognized ;  "  the  right  of  the  master  there  to 
sell"  is  an  acknowledged  right ;  and  these,  and  all  other 
essential  regulations  of  those  systems,  dating  back  as  far 
as  any  certain  knowledge  of  those  people  extends,  are, 
among  those  tribes,  of  the  nature  of  "  positive  law."  The 
Southern  courts  do  not  decline  to  "inquire  into  the  foun 
dation  of  that  slavery"  because  there  was  any  difficulty  in 
finding  a  legal  basis  for  it,  but  because  they  must  have 
some  place  to  begin,  and  they  might  as  well  begin  with 
the  "purchase"  founded  on  "  recognizing  the  rights  of  the 
master  there  to  sell"  as  anywhere  else ;  and  yet,  that 
"  right  to  sell"  must,  of  course,  rest  on  the  right  of  posses 
sion,  which,  if  inquired  into,  would  inevitably  involve  the 
legal  status  of  "  the  foundation  of  that  slavery."  If  that 
"foundation  had  not  thus  been  tacitly  assumed  to  be 
legal,  "  the  rights  of  the  master  there  to  sell"  could  not 
have  been  legal,  nor  "the  title  of  the  purchaser  from  him  ;" 
and,  in  that  case,  as  in  "kidnapping,"  no  "legal  claim  to 
the  bondage  of  the  victim"  could  be  sustained.  But  the 
African  slavery  was  assumed  to  be  legal,  as  the  right  to 
"  sell"  and  to  "  purchase"  under  it  was  deemed  legal.  The 
basis,  therefore,  of  even  the  African  systems,  is,  so  far  as 
we  can  trace  it,  a  basis  of  "  positive  law." 

The  same  principle  of  recognizing  those  only  as  legally 
held  in  bondage  in  this  country,  who  were  legally  held  in 
slavery  in  Africa,  which  General  Cobb  declares  to  be  the 
rule  in  Southern  courts,  was  early  acted  upon  in  Massa 
chusetts.  General  Cobb  says :  "  The  Puritans  insisted  that 
the  traffic  should  be  confined  to  those  who  were  captives 
in  war  and  slaves  in  Africa.  Hence,  when,  in  1644  or 


THE    CONSOLING    ALTERNATIVE.  537 

1645,  a  Boston  ship  returned  with  two  negroes  captured 
by  the  crew,  in  a  pretended  quarrel  with  the  natives,  the 
General  Court  ordered  them  to  be  restored  to  their  native 
land."  This  shows  that  all  parties,  at  that  early  day, 
deemed  negro  slavery  in  this  country  as  having  no  other 
proper  origin  than  a  legal  one. 

THE   CONSOLING   ALTEENATIVE. 

If  any  persons  choose  to  go  still  further,  and  search  for 
"  natural  causes  and  causes  of  universal  operation,"  under 
which  they  imagine  those  African  systems  may  have  come 
into  being  prior  to  their  having  any  legal  status, — of  which 
they  know  absolutely  nothing  with  certainty, — they  will, 
in  all  probability,  find,  as  before  stated,  only  fraud  and 
force,  and  all  the  cruelties  and  crimes  which  the  facts 
which  are  positively  known  suggest. 

If  this  affords  any  better  foundation  for  satisfaction  to 
the  Christian  conscience,  we  do  not  know  that  it  would 
be  wise  to  disturb  it.  It  may  be  convenient  to  attempt  to 
push  the  system,  to  avoid  a  legal  origin,  on  into  African 
darkness,  but  we  do  not  think  it  is  sensible. 

But,  be  all  this  as  it  may  be,  there  is  nothing  clearer 
under  the  light  of  the  heavens,  than  the  contrary  of  Dr. 
Thornwell's  assertions.  "Slavery,"  in  this  country,  did 
arise,  and  is  continued,  "  under  the  operation  of  positive 
law"  Such  is  the  testimony  of  history,  of  Southern  law, 
and  of  Southern  judicial  decisions:  connecting  its  legal 
status  here  with  its  legal  status  in  Africa. 

As  we  stated  in  the  beginning  of  the  discussion  upon  the 
"  Polemics"  of  Slavery,  our  space  by  no  means  allows  us 
to  present  an  exhaustive  consideration  of  the  subject.  Nor 
is  this  necessary.  We  have  noticed  a  few  points  which 
are  radical,  and  which  are  always  relied  upon  as  the  main 


538  SLAVERY    IN   POLEMICS.— LAW    OF    NATURE. 

positions  from  which  the  system  is  defended.     If  these  are 
untenable,  all  the  rest  is  mere  skirmishing. 

We  freely  confess  that  we  take  very  little  interest,  at 
present,  in  any  discussion  with  the  pen  upon  the  right  or 
wrong  of  slavery  ;  and  perhaps  the  reader  will  take  fur  less. 
We  shall  not  blame  him  if  he  does.  A  discussion  concern 
ing  it  is  going  on  in  the  country,  of  infinitely  deeper 
moment  to  every  American  citizen.  As  its  friends  have 
appealed  to  the  sword  in  its  defence,  let  its  merits  be 
decided  with  that  weapon  ;  and  may  God  sustain  the  right ! 


THE   EXTERNAL   SITUATION.  539 


CHAPTER  XY. 

REYIEW  AND   CONCLUSION. 

WE  bring  this  work  to  a  close  in  the  present  chapter. 
Several  subjects  on  which  we  had  proposed  to  dwell,  and 
some  chapters  fully  written,  are  entirely  omitted,  to  avoid 
swelling  the  volume  to  a  larger  size. 

The  general  subject  which  has  enlisted  our  pen  is  one 
that  must  deeply  interest  every  American  citizen,  as 
indeed  it  has  awakened  the  interest  and  stimulated  the 
inquiries  of  the  whole  civilized  world. 

THE    EXTERNAL   SITUATION. 

It  is  safe  to  say  that  no  contest  of  arms  in  modern  or 
ancient  times  has  embraced  elements  of  wider  range,  in 
their  bearing  upon  the  general  welfare  of  mankind,  than 
the  great  American  struggle  now  progressing.  At  the 
outset,  it  so  seriously  disturbed  the  industrial  concerns  of 
the  two  largest  nations  of  Western  Europe,  to  name  no 
more,  threatening  thousands  of  operatives  with  starvation 
and  endangering  the  public  tranquillity,  that  it  was  feared 
they  would,  in  self-defence,  become  parties  to  the  quarrel, 
and  thus  enlarge  the  theatre  of  war.  And  during  every 
stage  of  the  strife  thus  far,  an  uneasy  feeling  about 
"  foreign  intervention"  has  more  or  less  constantly  haunted 
the  minds  of  the  people. 

This  was  counted  on  by  the  leaders  of  the  rebellion  as 

an  absolute  necessity,  involving,  as   they  supposed,  the 

daily  bread  of  millions,  and  the  regular  flow  of  business 

in  all  the  channels  of  trade.     Without  this  hope,  it  is 

24 


540  REVIEW   AND   CONCLUSION. 

highly  improbable  that  they  would  have  ventured  on  a 
bloody  revolution.  But  they  believed  they  were  masters 
of  the  situation;  that  they  had  but  to  speak,  and  the 
world  would  obey.  Hence,  they  defiantly  proclaimed : 
"  It  is  a  remarkable  fact,  that  during  these  thirty  years 
of  unceasing  warfare  against  slavery,  and  while  a  lying 
spirit  has  inflamed  the.  world  against  us,  that  world  has 
grown  more  and  more  dependent  upon  it  for  sustenance 
and  wealth."  "Strike  now  a  blow  at  this  system  of 
labor,  and  the  world  itself  totters  at  the  stroke."  It  is 
not  wonderful,  under  this  hallucination,  that  in  their 
schemes  of  treason  they  should  have  attempted  to  justify 
themselves  on  the  ground  that  they  were  discharging  a 
"  duty"  in  this  regard  which  they  owed  "  to  the  civilized 
world." 

That  the  industry  of  the  nations  has  suffered,  and  that 
their  internal  quiet  and  peace  with  us  have  been  imperilled, 
is  unquestionable ;  but  that  the  world's  industry,  its  trade, 
its  tranquillity,  were  absolutely  tied  to  the  stake  which 
they  held,  the  event  has  disproved.  It  is  nevertheless  true 
that  this  belief,  begetting  the  confidence  that  foreign 
intervention  were  a  necessity,  nerved  them  to  strike  the 
first  blow ;  and  it  is  also  just  as  true,  that  the  foreign  aid 
which  they  have  actually  received,  by  land  and  sea,  during 
every  hour  of  the  war,  has  enabled  them  to  strike  every 
subsequent  blow  with  more  effect,  and  that  without  such 
aid  the  rebellion  w^ould  long  since  undoubtedly  have  be»*» 
crushed. 

RESPONSIBILITY    OF    FOREIGN   POWERS. 

This  feature  of  the  case  shows  the  magnitude  and 
bearings  of  the  contest,  not  only  by  revealing  what  has 
been  put  at  hazard,  touching  the  actual  necessities  of 
toiling  millions,  but  it  draws  into  a  deeper  channel  the 


RESPONSIBILITY    OF    FOREIGN    POWERS.  541 

great  question  of  international  comity.  That  the  United 
States,  in  contest  with  a  rebellion  against  its  lawful  au 
thority,  provoked  by  no  governmental  aggressiou,  as  the 
greatest  statesman  of  the  South  declared, — a  rebellion 
begun  and  prosecuted  solely  for  independence  in  the 
interests  of  negro  slavery, — should  have  encountered, 
under  the  name  of  "  neutrality,"  the  early,  consistent, 
determined  opposition  of  the  great  powers  of  Western 
Europe,  in  aiding  the  rebellion  in  ships,  munitions  of 
war,  and  in  every  other  way  which  was  possible  or  safe, 
presents  a  view  which  gives  no  satisfaction  to  those  who 
prefer  peace  to  war,  and  international  friendship  to 
enmity. 

But  the  facts  cannot  be  set  aside  by  any  sentimental 
philosophizing.  They  are  written  hi  deeds  of  blood. 
They  mark  every  battle-field  where  lie  bleaching  the 
bones  of  the  slain.  They  are  imprinted  on  every  rebel 
breastwork  mounted  with  English  cannon.  They  are 
seen  in  every  rebel  platoon  armed  with  English  rifles. 
They  are  found  on  the  deck  of  every  piratical  cruiser, 
built  in  English  ports,  carrying  English  guns,  supplied 
with  English  powder,  and  manned  by  English  seamen. 
The  tale  which  these  outfits  of  a  "  neutral"  power  tell,  is 
read  in  the  death-cries  of  our  fathers,  husbands,  sons, 
and  brothers,  and  is  heard  in  the  midnight  wail  of  the 
homeless  widow  and  the  orphan.  It  is  read  in  the  perils 
which  still  hang  over  our  national  destiny,  and  in  the 
alternate  hope  and  fear  which  thrill  the  hearts  of  millions, 
lest,  after  all  the  sacrifices  made  for  our  national  honor 
and  safety,  for  human  freedom  at  home  and  for  down 
trodden  mnn  abroad,  our  national  disintegration  should 
fall  a  prey  to  foreign  jealousy  of  our  rivalship  and  great 
ness,  through  a  perfidy  as  venal  as  the  hypocrisy  of  the 
powers  which  exhibit  it  is  transparent. 


542  REVIEW    AND    CONCLUSION. 


THE    COMING    BECKONING. 

It  is  not  in  human  nature  to  pass  over  these  things 
without  a  settlement.  It  may  come  soon,  or  it  may  be 
deferred.  That  the  day  of  reckoning  will  come,  we  have 
no  more  doubt  than  that  there  is  a  God  in  the  heavens. 
The  deeds  which  demand  it  are  imprinted  on  the  memory 
of  this  generation  indelibly.  The  impression  will  be 
transmitted  to  the  generations  to  come.  In  God's  own 
time  and  manner,  whether  soon  or  hereafter,  the  debt 
will  be  paid  with  compound  interest.  We  but  speak,  as 
we  verily  believe,  the  common  mind  and  common  heart  of 
this  nation. 

For  the  depredations  upon  American  commerce  com 
mitted  by  English  piratical  cruisers,  we  doubt  not  a 
demand  will  be  made  by  our  Government.  That  a  record 
of  every  case  is  scrupulously  made,  we  do  know.  Whether 
the  demand  for  compensation  will  be  complied  with,  we 
do  not  know.  Whether  refusal  will  be  made  a  casus 
belli,  is  of  no  material  concern.  Full  compensation  for 
actual  losses  at  sea  would  be  but  as  a  grain  of  sand  in  the 
scale  of  accumulated  obligations.  There  are  debts  in 
curred  which  can  never  be  paid  in  pounds,  shillings,  and 
pence.  There  are  duties  to  be  discharged  which  can  be 
met  only  by  an  exhibition  of  the  national  power  of.  the 
United  States  towards  those  who  have  forever  blackened 
their  honor  in  endeavoring  to  work  our  ruin  ;  who  have, 
with  a  meanness  and  a  littleness  which  no  Avords  can  ade 
quately  express,  seized  upon  the  hour  of  our  domestic 
calamity  to  cripple  the  rivalry  of  our  power  by  division, 
to  humble  our  honor  in  the  dust,  that  they  might  lord  it 
over  us,  as  they  have  always  lorded  it  over  the  smaller 
States  of  Europe.  In  no  other  way  can  this  balance  be 
adjusted. 


ESSENTIAL    DISCRIMINATIONS.  543 


RETRIBUTIVE    JUSTICE. 

But  this  is  "  vengeance,"  cry  the  timid  and  the  meek. 
It  is  justice,  we  reply;  and  a  justice  which  will  meet 
the  approval  of  Heaven.  It  will  conserve  the  ultimate 
interests  of  humanity,  and  preserve  the  peace  of  the 
world.  A  nation,  to  make  itself  respected,  must  exact 
that  which  is  just,  and  inflexibly  hold  to  the  right  and 
the  true.  If  it  permit  wrong  after  wrong  to  be  heaped 
up  mountain  high,  with  no  effort  at  redress,  it  sinks  into 
contempt,  becomes  the  prey  of  every  power,  and  can 
never  count  securely  on  peace ;  while,  on  the  other  hand, 
such  a  course  hazards  the  peace  of  the  world. 

The  principle  of  justice  is  the  highest  recognized  by 
writers  on  international  law  as  proper  between  nations. 
This  they  must  exemplify  in  practice.  It  is  on  this  ground 
alone  that  we  insist  that  the  United  States  owes  a  debt  to 
herself  and  to  humanity,  respecting  the  great  powers  of 
Western  Europe,  which  she  must  eventually  discharge. 
That  it  is  a  debt  of  the  clearest  justice,  we  shall  not  waste 
words  to  argue  with  any  one  who  chooses  to  dispute  it. 
That  it  will  be  cancelled,  we  have  no  manner  of  doubt. 

ESSENTIAL    DISCRIMINATIONS. 

That  we  have  warm  friends  in  both  England  and  France 
we  all  know.  We  honor  Victor  Hugo,  and  others  of  the 
French  Academy.  Looking  to  England,  we  praise  God 
for  her  John  Bright  and  her  Richard  Cobden  in  her  Parlia 
ment  ;  for  her  Professor  Newman  and  Goldwin  Smith, 
among  scholars  ;  for  her  Star  and  her  News  of  the  London 
press  ;  and  for  hosts  of  others.  But  her  Government,  her 
aristocracy,  and  hordes  of  her  merchant  princes,  have 
been  our  sworn  enemies,  to  the  full  extent  that  their  selfish 
interests  and  their  sordid  fears  would  permit.  With  the 


544  EEVIEW    AND    CONCLUSION. 

government  and  the  aristocracy,  the  interest  is  concen 
trated  in  their  power;  with  the  trading  classes,  in  the 
pocket. 

As  for  their  opposition  to  slavery,  so  demonstrative  in 
days  that  are  past,  it  was  strong,  and  their  weapons 
were  always  burnished  and  ready,  so  long  as  slave  pro 
ducts  were  filling  their  coffers  with  gold.  But  when  a 
rebellion  arose  to  make  slavery  more  secure  than  ever,  to 
expand  its  area  and  perpetuate  its  power,  with  honorable 
exceptions  they  wheeled  promptly  about  in  support  of  the 
war  waged  in  its  interest,  and  against  the  Government 
seeking  its  overthrow,  because  their  profits  from  the  insti 
tution  were  diminished. 

POCKET   PHILANTHROPY. 

We  shall  never  be  at  a  loss  hereafter  for  an  exact  stand 
ard  by  which  to  measure  British  philanthropy,  in  a  cause 
where  the  interests  of  down-trodden  millions  are  con 
cerned.  Its  criterion  is  the  pocket.  They  are  for  their 
freedom  and  elevation,  so  long  as  their  actual  bondage 
helps  the  pocket.  They  are  for  their  slavery  and  degra 
dation,  if  their  freedom  or  their  efforts  to  obtain  it  endan 
ger  the  fulness  of  the  pocket. 

We  would  not  revile  our  British  brethren ;  we  have 
friends  among  them,  and  relatives.  But  the  great  Napo 
leon  once  said,  that  they  were  but  a  nation  of  shop 
keepers. 

While  we  thus  speak,  we  shall  ever  honor  those,  in  Par 
liament  and  out  of  it,  who  have  raised  their  voices  for 
freedom  and  humanity,  and  for  our  right  to  manage  our 
internal  affairs  in  quelling  a  foul  rebellion  without  their  in 
terference  ;  resisting  on  the  one  hand  class  interests  and 
governmental  power  at  work  to  reach  their  sinister  t-nds, 
and  on  the  other  that  narrow  spirit  which  measures  every 


FOREIGN   ENMITY   PERSISTENT.  545 

thing  by  the  value  of  a  farthing.     For  them  we  have  an 
abiding  affection.  ,  .«. 

OUR    CAUSE    MISREPRESENTED. 

The  class  for  whom,  we  have  the  deepest  contempt, 
among  foreign  nations,  embraces  those  who  are  looked  up 
to  as  guides  of  public  opinion.  The  impression  they  have 
most  studiously  sought  to  make  is,  that  ours  is  a  mere 
contest  for  power,  for  territorial  aggrandizement.  This 
they  reiterate  in  Parliament,  upon  the  hustings,  through 
the  press.  They  say  it  so  often,  so  boldly,  and  in  such 
places,  that  it  is  not  wonderful  that  many  among  the 
people  who  take  their  cue  from  them  believe  it. 

But  this  is  not  only  the  basest  of  falsehoods,  but,  the 
worst  of  all  is,  they  know  it  to  be  so  ;  and  this  is  true  when 
applied  to  Lords  Palmerston  and  John  Russell  in  Parliament, 
and  to  the  columns  of  the  London  Times.  We  presume 
that  neither  of  these  high  dignitaries,  nor  the  great  Thun 
derer,  will  care  for  our  individual  opinion  ;  nor  we  for  theirs. 
The  only  importance  the  case  has  in  our  eyes,  is,  that  they 
delight  in  stabbing  our  national  life  through  their  personal 
and  official  villany. 

FOREIGN    ENMITY    PERSISTENT. 

Let  it  not  be  said  that  we  are  stirring  up  bad  blood. 
That  element  has  already  been  infused  into  our  international 
relations  by  the  course  of  the  powers  of  which  we  speak. 
We  take  the  case  simply  as  they  present  it.  In  a  great 
contest  for  existence,  we  treat  those  abroad  as  those  at 
home  ;  as  friends  or  as  foes. 

If  it  be  said,  that  these  foreign  powers  are  more 
friendly  now  than  formerly,  we  answer  that  we  see  no 
proof  of  it.  If  it  be  said  that  there  is  less  danger  of  in 
tervention  now  than  formerly,  or  no  danger  at  all,  we 


546  REVIEW    AND    CONCLUSION. 

admit  it.  But  it  is  because  they  see  it  to  be  useless,  or 
that  in  intermeddling  there  may  be  danger.  Those  who 
have  been  our  enemies  abroad  are  so  still.  Give  them  an 
opportunity,  and  they  would  show  it.  Let  our  national 
capital  be  taken,  or  any  extraordinary  disaster  to  our  arms 
occur,  and  all  the  aristocracies  of  Europe  would  shout  for 
joy,  and  the  echoes  would  be  heard  over  the  earth.  Let 
Jefferson  Davis  and  his  Slave  Confederacy  be  recognized 
by  us,  and  their  exultations  would  rend  the  very  heavens. 

While  the  great  antagonistic  elements  of  American  and 
European  civilization  exist  before  the  eyes  of  the  world's 
millions,  it  is  perfectly  idle  to  say  that  the  ruling  powers 
of  Europe  have  any  other  wish  than  our  national  dismem 
berment  and  total  overthrow.  If  we  are  pointed  to  the 
large  numbers  of  the  middle  classes,  we  find  this  to  be  true  : 
the  more  influential  among  them,  as  a  whole,  would  be  for 
or  against  us,  as  their  own  commercial  profits  would  be 
enhanced  by  the  one  course  or  the  other;  while  those 
honorable  exceptions  who  sympathize  with  our  Govern 
ment  against  rebellion,  are  but  the  exceptions,  and  are 
well-nigh  powerless  against  those  who  sway  the  destinies 
of  European  politics. 

THE   POPULAR   MASSES    WITH   US. 

Turning  away  from  the  rulers  to  the  teeming  millions, 
and  though  we  do  not  find  them  arrayed  in  court  dresses 
and  rolling  by  in  aristocratic  pomp,  the  view  is  refreshing. 
They  have  a  true  sympathy  with  popular  liberty,  a  heart 
detesting  oppression  and  a  hand  raised  to  strike  it  down, 
whether  the  sceptre  of  power  be  the  mace  of  the  noble 
man  or  the  whip  of  the  slave-driver.  They  watch  our 
contest  with  an  intensity  of  interest  surpassed  only  by  our 
loyal  citizens. 

They  have  confidence  in  our  triumph.     This  is  seen  in 


THE   POPULAR   MASSES    WITH    US.  547 

their  actions.  At  no  period  in  our  history  has  immigra 
tion  from  Europe  been  so-  rapid  as  during  the  war.  This 
is  not  by  reason  of  the  large  bounties  paid  to  soldiers. 
This  may  influence  some.  But  the  mass  come  with  their 
families,  and  to  better  their  condition.  Our  taxes  do  not 
deter  them.  The  fear  of  national  ruin  does  not  deter 
them.  They  believe  we  shall  triumph.  They  see  in  that 
triumph  the  inauguration  of  popular  liberty  on  a  grander 
scale  than  is  promised  in  any  other  land  of  the  broad 
earth.  They  come  to  enjoy  it,  and  to  secure  a  heritage 
for  their  children.  As  friends  of  liberty  and  of  the  op 
pressed  everywhere,  we  welcome  them  from  every  nation 
under  the  wide  heavens. 

Another  token  of  sympathy  from  the  heart  of 'the people 
of  Europe,  is  seen  in  their  Addresses  to  the  People  of  the 
United  States,  encouraging  them  in  the  contest  with 
slavery  and  rebellion.  Many  of  these  have  been  received 
since  the  war  has  been  progressing  ;  several  coming  from 
the  people  of  the  British  Isles,  and  others  from  Conti 
nental  countries. 

One  of  the  latest,  just  heralded  to  the  world  as  we  write, 
is  from  the  people  of  Geneva,  one  of  the  earliest  and 
firmest  homes  of  popular  liberty  in  Europe.  It  is  thrilling 
to  the  heart  of  every  true  American,  and  must  nerve  the 
arm  of  the  soldier  in  battle,  to  hear  the  echoes  of  these 
eloquent  voices  from  among  the  hills  of  Switzerland. 
They  close  their  Address,  made  to  the  "People  of  the 
American  Union,"  in  the  words :  "  Hail,  Liberty  !  Hail, 
Republic  of  the  United  States !" 

We  rejoice  in  the  response  which  has  been  made  to  this 
Address  by  the  Secretary  of  State.  Mr.  Seward  says  : 
u  Your  Address  adds  strength  to  the  already  strong  claim 
which  binds  the  first  Federal  Republic  of  America  to  the 
oldest  and  foremost  Federal  Republic  of  Europe.  The 
24* 


548  EETIEW    AND    CONCLUSION. 

people  of  Switzerland  may  rest  assured,  whoever  else 
may  fail,  that  it  will  not  be  the  people  of  the  United  States 
which  will  betray  the  republican  system  to  foreign  ene 
mies,  or  surrender  it  to  domestic  faction" 

God  grant  that  this  pledge  of  the  Secretary  of  State, 
made  on  behalf  of  the  Government  and  People  of  the 
United  States,  may  be  kept  inviolate  ! 

THE    INTERNAL    SITUATION. 

We  have  looked  at  the  aspect  of  things  from  without; 
at  the  adverse  influences  operating  against  us  in  foreign 
nations ;  and  at  the  favorable  influence  we  are  exerting 
upon  the  masses  of  the  people,  and  the  interest  the  real 
people  of  Europe  take  in  our  struggle. 

We  turn  our  view  within,  and  look  at  some  things  at 
home.  This  has,  indeed,  been  the  theme  of  our  entire 
writing.  We  do  not  desire  to  repeat  or  to  recapitulate 
what  we  have  said,  but  we  will  notice  a  few  points  of  the 
general  subject,  suggested  by  what  has  already  gone  before. 

We  take  it  for  granted  that  no  subject  has  ever  so  in 
terested  the  American  people,  since  they  have  been  a 
people,  as  that  which  now  rocks  this  nation  on  its  deepest 
foundations.  We  can  conceive  of  no  subject,  next  to 
one's  personal  salvation,  which  can  take  so  deep  a  hold 
upon  the  mind  and  heart  of  an  American  citizen,  as  that 
which  involves  the  great  issues  bound  up  in  our  present 
contest. 

WHAT   THE    CONTEST    EXHIBITS. 

What  is  at  stake? — what  is  involved  ?•  -what  has  called 
mighty  armies  into  the  field  ? — for  what  are  we  pouring 
out  our  best  blood,  and  covering  all  the  plains  of  the 
South  with  the  mangled  limbs  of  the  slain  ? — and  for 
what  are  we  encumbering  ourselves  and  our  children  with 
a  debt  under  which  generations  will  groan  ? 


WHAT   THE    CONTEST    EXHIBITS.  549 

To  hear  some  people  talk,  and  to  read  whnt  some  peo 
ple  write,  it  would  seem  that  we  are  merely  engaged  in  a 
partisan  contest,  a  political  scramble.  They  therefore  bid 
the  combatants  desist,  rush  into  each  other's  arms,  and 
fall  upon  each  other's  necks  in  loving  embrace.  We 
should  rejoice  at  the  spectacle. 

We  envy  not  the  head  or  the  heart  of  that  man  who 
cannot  take  a  higher  view  of  the  "  situation"  than  this ; 
who  cannot  see  in  the  elements  of  the  strife  that  which 
is  infinitely  above  any  partisan  or  sordid  interest ;  but 
who,  from  his  stand-point,  is  ever  prating  of  "  peace,"  and 
gloating  over  the  horrors  of  the  war.  Peace  is  a  lovely 
and  heaven-descended  messenger,  and  war  is  a  grim- 
visaged  visitant  of  woes.  No  one  in  this  fair  land  will 
welcome  the  coming  of  the  one  and  the  eternal  departure 
of  the  other  with  more  hearty  rejoicing  than  shall  we. 
But  we  are  free  to  say,  that  we  have  no  wish  for  this 
happy  result,  until  peace  can  be  so  determined  as  shall  give 
us  a  security  for  peace.  We  have  no  wish  to  fight  these 
battles  over  a  fe\y  years  hence,  and  continually. 

This  contest  exhibits,  on  the  one  side,  a  rebellion  in 
arms  against  lawful  Government,  gotten  up  by  disap 
pointed  demagogues,  to  make  their  rule  more  secure  over 
the  victims  of  their  cruel  bondage,  four  millions  of  negro 
slaves,  and  to  extend  the  system  indefinitely,  and  to  con 
tinue  it  perpetually  ;  originating  in  the  false  hue  and  cry, 
that  the  Government  was  to  be  administered  against  their 
vested  rights. 

On  the  other  side,  the  Government,  in  the  exercise  of 
its  constitutional  rights,  and  in  the  discharge  of  its  God- 
given  duty,  sustained  by  the  people,  is  engaged  in  putting 
down  this  rebellion  by  Heaven's  ordained  means,  the 
sword;  and  as  the  rebellion  sprung  out  of  the  interest  of 
the  leaders  in  negro  slavery,  and  has  its  chief  support  in 


550  BEVIEW   AND    CONCLUSION. 

that  system,  the  Government  is  determined,  as  a  necessary 
means  to  its  own  salvation,  to  destroy  slavery,  and  let 
the  oppressed  go  free. 

This  is  the  contest,  and  this  is  the  whole  of  it.  It  is 
then  a  contest  for  national  life,  by  a  lawful  Government, 
against  a  foul  rebellion,  seeking  its  overthrow.  This  is 
the  simple  and  sole  issue  :  a  lawful  Government  contend 
ing  against  a  wicked  rebellion. 

FRIENDS    AND    FOES. 

In  such  an  issue,  it  is  impossible  that  there  should  be 
but  two  parties ;  just  as  the  House  of  Representatives 
unanimously  resolved — "  patriots  and  traitors." 

The  question  is  so  simple,  it  cannot  be  otherwise.  It  is 
incapable  of  division.  It  is  maintaining  our  National 
Unity,  or  allowing  it  to  be  destroyed;  triumphing  over 
the  rebels,  or  allowing  them  to  triumph  over  us.  On  this 
issue,  one  or  the  other  must  conquer.  The  contrary  is  a 
simple  impossibility;  even  a  compromise  cannot  prevent 
it.  If  we  maintain  the  Union  intact,  we  conquer  them. 
If  it  is  dissolved,  they  conquer  us,  for  it  is  for  our  nation 
ality  we  are  contending.  If  we  maintain  the  Union,  even 
with  a  compromise  on  slavery,  or  on  any  other  question,  still 
we  conquer ;  for  the  maintenance  of  our  nationality  is 
the  vital  question.  So  that,  in  any  view,  as  they  are  con 
tending  to  dismember  the  Union,  and  we  to  preserve  it, 
one  party  or  the  other  must  triumph,  and  that  involves 
the  conquering  of  the  other  party.  No  other  result  is 
physically  possible. 

It  is  on  this  simple  issue  that  we  say,  that  every  man  is 
either  a  friend  or  a  foe  of  the  Government ;  helping  to 
maintain  our  nationality,  or  aiding  to  overthrow  it.  In 
difference,  or  neutrality,  in  this  case,  we  deem  not  to  exist 
in  any  man's  bosom,  in  point  of  fact.  We  do  not  believe 


SUBORDINATE    QUESTIONS.  551 

any  American  citizen  is  or  can  be  neutral.  But  if  it  be 
possibly  so  in  any  case,-  his  position  is  a  criminal  one, 
before  God  and  man ;  and  for  such  a  man,  if  he  has  a 
soul,  we  feel  infinitely  less  respect  than  for  many  who  are 
in  open  arms  against  the  Government. 

We  will  not  argue  here  the  right  of  the  case.  We  only 
say,  that  those  who  are  living  under  the  protection  of  the 
Government, — in  the  loyal  States,  where  its  flng  still 
waves, — and  are  aiding  rebels  in  arms,  or  even  tacitly 
sympathizing  with  them,  are  in  a  position,  and  doing  a 
work,  or  entertaining  a  sentiment,  which  is  offensive  to 
God,  and  will  eventually  cover  them  with  odium. 

SUBORDINATE    QUESTIONS. 

There  are  many  questions  on  which  loyal  men  may 
honestly  differ:  as  upon  the  necessity  of  destroying  sla 
very,  in  order  to  save  the  Government ;  or,  if  it  is  to  be 
removed,  the  proper  manner  of  its  termination  ;  or,  whe 
ther  it  shall  be  destroyed  in  the  rebel  regions  only ;  and 
upon  arbitrary  arrests,  habeas  corpus,  and  other  important 
questions. 

We  regard  these,  of  necessity,  each  and  all,  independent 
of  and  subordinate  to  the  vital  issue  of  our  nationality ; 
and  we  regard  that  as  vital,  simply  on  the  ground  that 
right,  truth,  honor,  justice,  law,  order,  and  every  other 
principle  involving  good  government,  demand  that  it  should 
be  maintained  ;  and  because,  unless  it  is  maintained,  we 
shall  have  eternal  war  instead  of  any  enduring  peace. 

This  being  our  judgment,  as  we  are  now  at  war,  we  say, 
let  the  war  be  prosecuted  until  rebellion  is  crushed,  and 
peace  can  be  maintained  on  firm  foundations.  Other  ques 
tions,  even  slavery,  we  deem  subordinate ;  for,  as  we  have 
tried  to  show  in  a  previous  chapter,  we  think  it  has  the 
poorest  possible  chance  for  life,  in  any  issue  of  the  war ; 


552  REVIEW    AND    CONCLUSION. 

and  yet,  we  greatly  prefer  to  see  no  vestige  of  it  survive 
the  rebellion. 

ADMINISTRATION    AND    GOVERNMENT. 

We  take  the  same  view,  substantially,  concerning  the 
present  Administration,  or  any  other  that  may  be  for  the 
time  in  power.  Men  and  policies  are  subordinate,  arid  as 
far  as  possible  should  be  so  treated,  or  left  out  of  the 
account  altogether.  The  NATION,  the  GOVERNMENT,  the 
UNION  ;  these  are  the  vital  matters. 

We  think  some  persons  make  a  serious  mistake  in  fail 
ing  utterly  to  sustain  the  Government,  because  they  are 
not  friendly  to  the  Administration;  having  personal  ob 
jections,  or  dissenting  from  some  points  of  its  policy. 
Some  truly  loyal  people  are  found  in  this  category ;  many 
who  are  at  heart  disloyal,  present  such  objections  as  a 
cloak  for  their  treason. 

Any  Administration  actually  in  office,  embodies  for  the 
time  the  authority,  the  power,  and  the  dignity  of  the 
Government,  and  as  such  justly  demands  all  the  obedience 
and  honor  due  to  the  highest  civil  authority.  Nor  can  we, 
practically,  distinguish  between  them.  We  can,  indeed, 
readily  understand  the  difference  between  the  Government 
and  any  particular  Administration  in  power ;  for  the  Govern 
ment  is  permanent,  while  Administrations  and  their  policies 
are  evanescent  and  conflicting.  But  the  difference  is 
wholly  abstract  or  theoretical.  Government,  independent 
of  an  Administration,  is  an  inoperative  lifeless  body ;  while 
an  Admin' stration  is  essential  to  give  it  soul,  activity,  life, 
power.  No  Government,  whatever  its  form,  acts,  or  can 
act,  but  by  and  through  an  Administration.  Laws  are  not 
self-executing.  Constitutions  have  no  inherent  vitality. 
Constitutions  and  laws  are  made  by  the  people,  and  for 
the  people ;  but  they  must  be  executed  by  the  people's 


TRUE   PRINCIPLE    OF   SUPPORT. — OBJECTIONS.          553 

servants ;  through  a  personal  administration,  and  that  of 
fallible  men. 

As  it  is  impossible  to  have  an  operative  Government 
but  through  an  Administration,  so  it  is  impossible  to  sup 
port  a  Government,  but  by  supporting  its  Administration. 
If  men  dissent  from  certain  measures  of  the  policy  of  an 
Administration,  they  must  still  support  it,  if  they  support 
the  Government. 

TRUE    PRINCIPLE    OF    SUPPORT. OBJECTIONS. 

In  a  great  contest  for  national  life,  the  truly  loyal  will 
make  as  few  objections,  and  give  as  generous  support  to 
those  in  power,  who  are  endeavoring  to  save  the  nation 
and  crush  rebellion,  as  is  compatible  with  their  conscien 
tious  convictions  of  duty.  No  other  principle  can  be 
adopted  as  a  rule  of  action,  consistent  either  with  personal 
honor  or  national  safety. 

But  it  is  lamentably  true,  that  many  who  claim  to  be 
opposed  to  the  rebellion,  and  in  favor  of  putting  it  down, 
entirely  withhold  their  support  IV om  the  Government  in  its 
efforts  to  crush  it,  because  they  dissent  from  some  measures 
adopted  for  that  end.  And  it  is  further  lamentably  true, 
that  when  these  objections  are  summed  up,  those  who 
hold  the  aggregate  amount  constitute  a  large  body  of 
citizens.  Some  dissent,  because  the  Government  does  not 
go  far  enough  and  fast  enough  ;  others,  for  precisely  the 
opposite  reasons  ;  some,  because  the  Government  has  med 
dled  at  all  with  slavery ;  others,  because  it  did  not  make  war 
upon  it  from  the  first,  or  sweep  it  at  once  away  by  proclama 
tion  ;  some,  because  it  has  suspended  the  privilege  of  the 
writ  of  habeas  corpus ;  others,  because  it  has  committed 
errors  in  arresting  disloyal  citizens;  and  on  a  hundred 
other  points  which  naturally  arise  out  of  such  a  contest 
among  such  a  people,  many  are  found  to  dissent,  and  as. 


554  REVIEW    AND    CONCLUSION. 

far  as  possible  wholly  withhold  their  support ;  who,  at  the 
same  time  and  in  the  same  breath,  claim  that  they  are 
loyal,  and  who  would  resent  it  as  an  insult  should  any 
suspicion  of  disloyalty  be  cast  upon  them. 

There  is  another  phase  of  the  case  which  is  even  worse. 
Some  are  not  content  in  withholding  support,  but  take 
pains  to  throw  every  obstacle  in  their  power  in  the  way 
of  the  Government,  being  careful  not  to  overstep  the  line 
of  personal  safety.  We  need  not  specify  the  numerous 
ways  by  which  this  is  done,  by  public  men  and  private. 
The  facts  are  simply  notorious.  Others  are  content  with 
speaking  against  the  Government,  where  no  other  motive 
is  apparent  than  the  pleasure  afforded  in  abusing  those  in 
power,  or  for  personal  relief. 

The  obvious  objection  to  this  whole  course,  and  to  any 
and  every  part  of  it,  in  those  who  claim  to  be  loyal,  must 
commend  itself  to  every  person  of  discernment.  It  tends 
to  hamper  the  Government,  and  give  the  most  substantial 
"  aid  and  comfort"  to  the  rebellion.  It  will  be  truly  won 
derful,  with  such  dead  weights  upon  it,  if  the  Government 
shall  succeed  at  all  in  putting  down  the  rebellion.  It  is 
wonderful  that  it  can  have  any  success,  with  such  friends, 
either  in  its  civil  or  military  policy.  And  yet,  these  very 
"friends"  are  complaining  that  it  does  not  succeed. 

No  person  will  understand  us  as  in  the  least  invading 
the  inherent  right  of  every  American  citizen  freely  to  can 
vass  any  measures  of  Government,  and  to  approve  or  to 
condemn,  according  to  his  best  judgment,  when  it  is  done 
in  a  proper  manner.  As  we  have  said  before,  men  are 
nothing,  administrations  are  nothing,  policies  and  measures 
arev  nothing,  in  a  great  contest  with  treason,  except  as  thoy 
bear  upon  the  great  issue,  national  salvation.  The  point 
we  urge  is,  that  the  Administration,  in  power  for  the 
time,  must  be  supported,  or  the  Government  cannot  be ; 


OPPOSING    THE    ADMINISTRATION.  555 

and  in  a  time  of  civil  war,  the  truly  loyal  will  give  that 
generous  support  which  patriotism  demands,  the  withhold 
ing  of  which  is  a  sin  against  God,  and  a  crime  against 
humanity. 

OPPOSING   THE   ADMINISTRATION.- — CHANGE   DEMANDED. 

There  is  still  another  phase  of  "loyalty,"  so  called, 
which  deserves  a  passing  notice.  So  intense  is  the  feeling 
of  some  who  claim  to  be  loyal,  that  they  proclaim  that 
they  will  not  give  one  iota  of  influence  to  sustain  the  Govern 
ment,  to  aid  the  war,  or  to  crush  the  rebellion, —all  which 
they  profess  to  wish  to  see  accomplished, — until  we  can 
have  a  change  of  administration.  They  deem  its  measures 
so  impolitic  or  wicked,  its  aims  so  selfish,  and  its  conduct 
so  corrupt,  that  until  there  is  a  change  they  cannot  con 
scientiously  aid  the  Government  in  any  possible  way ;  in 
recruiting  its  armies,  or  sustaining  those  now  in  the  field, 
or  in  any  other  measure  tending  directly  to  crush  the 
rebellion. 

To  mere  partisans,  who  wish  to  get  into  power  or  to  be 
carried  upon  the  back  of  some  one  who  does,  we  have 
nothing  to  say.  To  reason  with  partisan  prejudice  and 
passion  is  seldom  profitable.  For  another  class,  who  claim 
to  be  loyal,  and  whose  position  is  that  above  designated, 
we  have  a  word. 

There  are  two  ways  of  disposing  of  corrupt  officials, 
both  of  which  are  provided  for  by  law.  One  is  by  im 
peachment  ;  the  other  by  dismissal  at  the  end  of  their  term 
of  office,  that  is,  by  electing  some  one  else.  In  regard  to 
the  Administration  at  Washington,  as  Congress  will  not 
meet  till  after  the  Presidential  election,  the  latter  is  relied 
upon  to  work  the  change  essential  to  bring  to  the  support 
of  the  Government  those  who  cannot  support  it  until  a 
change  occurs. 


556  REVIEW    AND    CONCLUSION. 

Leaving  politicians  to  discuss  probabilities,  let  us  look 
at  what  all  must  admit  may  possibly  occur  on  the  first 
Tuesday  in  November  next. 

LOYALTY   PRACTICALLY   TESTED. 

Mr.  Lincoln  has  been  nominated  for  re-election.  General 
Fremont  is  also  a  candidate  for  the  Presidency.  A  candi 
date  is  to  be  nominated  at  Chicago  by  the  Democratic 
party.  Perhaps  others  may  be  put  in  nomination. 

It  will  be  admitted  that  Mr.  Lincoln  may  possibly  be  re- 
elected.  Suppose  he  should  be,  what  will  those  do  who 
claim  to  be  loyal, — some  of  whom  believe  that  they  person 
ally  embody  an  unusual  amount  of  that  sentiment, — but 
who  declare  that  they  cannot  and  will  not  support  the 
Government,  or  help  to  crush  the  rebellion,  while  Mr. 
Lincoln  is  in  power  ?  Will  they  add  four  years  more  of 
total  inaction,  or  opposition  and  vituperation,  to  the  time 
already  expended  in  that  way,  if  the  contest  with  treason 
should  continue  so  long,  while  other  citizens  are  using  all 
their  influence,  even  pouring  out  their  blood,  to  sustain 
the  Government  against  its  enemies  ?  Will  they  do  that, 
and  still  claim  to  be  loyal/ — still  claim  a  larger  amount 
of  patriotism  than  their  fellow-citizens? 

But  this  is  a  many  sided  question.  There  are  other 
possibilities.  The  election  of  General  Fremont,  we  may 
assume,  is  secured.  A  certain  class  of  those  who  suspend 
support  of  the  Government  upon  a  change  in  the  adminis 
tration  will  then  of  course  become  very  zealous  in  its  sup 
port.  But  suppose  the  friends  of  Mr.  Lincoln  should 
then  sny  they  would  withhold  all  support  while  Gener  il 
Fremont  was  in  power;  would  their  loyalty  suffer  no 
detriment  ? 

Or  if  the  Chicago  nominee  should  be  elected,  and  on 
coming  into  power  should  announce  such  a  policy  upon 


LOYALTY    ABOVE    PARTISANSHIP. — VIOLENCE.          557 

the  manner  of  dealing  with  the  rebellion  as  would  not 
satisfy  the  friends  of  the  present  Administration,  but  yet 
was  determined  on  maintaining  the  Union  intact,  would 
it  be  the  part  of  good  citizenship  to  withhold  support  from 
the  Government,  or  malign  it,  or  throw  obstacles  in  its 
way,  because  every  measure  of  the  new  Administration 
could  not  be  approved  ? 

But  if  the  policy  of  the  present  Administration,  as  to 
the  manner  of  dealing  with  the  rebellion, — objected  to 
from  opposite  grounds,  and  for  conflicting  reasons,  by 
different  and  disagreeing  classes, — can  justify  a  total  with 
holding  of  support,  the  same  dissent  from  some  measure 
of  policy  in  any  future  Administration  may  justify  like 
inaction  or  opposition.  We  are  then  brought  back  to  the 
principle  already  announced, — and  there  is  no  other  safe 
ground  to  occupy, — the  duty  of  every  citizen  to  sustain 
the  Government,  by  sustaining  the  Administration  for  the 
time  being  in  power,  by  whatever  party  elected,  in  crushing 
rebellion  avid  preserving  our  nationality,  even  though 
some  measures  of  its  policy  for  these  ends  may  not  be 
approved.  Any  other  principle  than  this  has  in  it  the 
germ  of  anarchy  and  ruin.  If  we  may  withhold  support  from 
the  Government  until  all  men  are  agreed  in  every  measure 
of  its  policy,  we  must  wait  till  doomsday — and  still  wait. 

LOYALTY    ABOVE    PARTISANSHIP. VIOLENCE. 

Let  no*one  imagine  that  we  view  things  from  a  partisan 
stand-point.  Far  different  from  that  is  our  feeling ;  far 
different  has  been  our  action;  far  different  will  both 
be  in  the  future.  We  have  given,  as  we  have  had 
ability,  our  influence  to  sustain  the  Government  in 
overthrowing  rebellion.  As  we  have  done  it  under 
this  Administration,  so  shall  we,  and  so  should  we  have 
done,  under  any  other.  Whoever  may  be  elected  in 


558  REVIEW    AND    CONCLUSION. 

November  next  to  administer  the  Government  shall  have 
our  unfailing  support.  We  know  of  no  other  stand  in 
Christian  honesty  to  take.  So  it  would  have  been  in  the 
past.  Had  Jefferson  Davis,  who  was  sought  to  be  put  in 
nomination  at  Charleston,  been  elected  President  of  the 
United  States  in  1860,  he  would  have  been  our  President, 
and  we  should  have  given  his  administration  that  support 
always  demanded  as  a  Christian  duty. 

It  is  believed  by  some, — indeed,  we  have  henrd  it  said 
by  those  whose  opportunities  are  good  for  gaining  infor 
mation,  beyond  what  appears  in  the  papers,  about  secret 
organizations  against  the  Government, — that  in  case  Mr. 
Lincoln  should  be  re-elected,  his  administration  would  not 
be  tolerated,  and  that  he  would  be  assassinated. 

That  there  are  men  base  enough  for  this  is  of  course 
true.  That  there  are  secret  organizations  for  this  purpose 
may  be  also  true.  That  there  are  men,  nil  through  the 
loyal  States,  ready  for  any  thing  which  will  destroy  the 
Government  and  give  triumph  to  the  rebellion,  is  beyond 
doubt  true.  But  we  have  not  lost  faith  in  the  loyalty  of 
the  people  at  large.  Desperadoes,  in  a  time  of  revolution, 
are  ready  for  any  thing.  But  we  do  not  believe  that 
partisanship  has  so  corrupted  the  masses  of  the  people 
who  are  for  sustaining  the  Government  and  putting  down 
the  rebellion,  that  they  would  for  a  moment  countenance 
a  revolution  against  any  Administration  which  the  people, 
should  constitutionally  put  in  power.  If  Mr.  Linco'.n  is  re- 
elected,  it  will  be  hailed  with  joy  by  his  friends,  and  be 
quietly  submitted  to  by  his  foes.  If  any  other  candidate 
is  elected,  the  same  result,  vice  versa,  will  be  seen.  Poli 
ticians  may  gnash  their  teeth,  on  one  sids  or  the  other,  as 
the  issue  shall  be  determined,  and  desperadoes,  whether 
within  or  without  the  Golden  Circle,  may  organize,  and 
arm,  and  bluster;  but  THE  PEOPLE  have  too  much  at 


THE  PATRIOT'S  REWARD.  559 

stake  to  inaugurate  or  support  a  revolution,  whoever  may 
attempt  to  lead  it,  against  any  Administration  constitution 
ally  elected.  Their  experience  with  the  rebellion  now  on 
their  hands,  convinces  them  that  one  thing  of  this  very 
sort  is  enough  at  a  time. 

GOD    REIGNS OUR   TRUST. 

We  have  said  we  have  not  lost  confidence  in  the  people. 
Much  less  have  we  lost  faith  in  God.  That  He  presides 
over  the  destinies  of  this  nation  we  know  from  His  word, 
for  He  presides  over  all.  And  though  His  word  does  not 
reveal  the  path  opened  for  us  in  the  future,  His  providence, 
as  we  have  attempted  to  show  elsewhere,  is  shaping  events, 
as  we  believe,  through  our  eventual  purification,  for  a 
more  glorious  career  for  this  people.  We  may  yet  have 
to  pass  through  a  fiercer  furnace  than  that  now  glowing. 
If  so,  it  will  be  just.  We  eminently  deserve  it. 

But  whatever  is  in  store  for  us,  whether  greater  trials 
or  speedy  deliverance,  and  by  whatever  means,  we  know 
that  all  events  are  in  His  hand,  and  that  He  will  do  His 
pleasure.  He  works  through  all  policies,  all  men,  all 
evwits,  and  reaches  His  ends  infallibly  and  gloriously. 

THE  PATRIOT'S  REWARD. 

The  national  contest  in  which  we  are  engaged,  places  a 
stamp  upon  men  and  things  which  time  can  never  efface. 
Those  who  are  sustaining  the  Government,  the  truly  loyal, 
will  have  their  names  and  their  deeds  transmitted  to  pos 
terity  with  honor.  They  will  go  down  to  coming  genera 
tions  in  a  grander  halo  of  glory  than  that  which  encircles 
the  memory  of  the  patriots  of  the  Revolutionary  Era ;  for, 
if  successful,  the  good  which  will  be  vouchsafed  to  the 
nation  in  its  salvation  from  anarchy,  and  in  the  triumph 
of  freedom,  will  f;ir  eclipse  that  which  was  secured  by  its 


560  REVIEW    AND    CONCLUSION. 

birth  and  independence.  If  they  fail,  their  reward  in  the 
esteem  of  the  wise  and  the  good  will  be  none  the  less,  for 
success  is  not  the  criterion  of  merit ;  and  it  will  still  be 
true,  that  they  battled  for  right,  for  law,  for  order,  for  free 
dom,  for  humanity,  against  treason  and  rebellion  opposing 
good  government,  and  forging  stronger  fetters  to  body 
and  soul  for  millions  in  human  form. 

But  they  cannot  fail.  God  is  in  the  contest,  and  His 
strong  arm  will  give  them  the  victory.  All  who  share  in 
the  conflict  will  share  in  the  reward  which  a  grateful 
people  will  bestow  upon  them.  As  we  have  been  accus 
tomed  to  venerate  the  names  of  those  who  signed  the 
Declaration  of  Independence,  and  on  every  anniversary  of 
our  nation's  birth  to  honor  the  surviving  representatives 
of  the  Revolutionary  army, 'so  it  will  be  in  the  days  to 
come  concerning  the  present  war.  The  men  who  have  led 
our  armies  to  buttle,  arid  the  soldier  who  has  stood  in  the 
ranks,  will  alike  be  honored  for  acts  of  greater  prowess, 
for  sacrifices  in  a  greater  cause,  and  for  securing  results  of 
far  higher  interest  to  the  nation  and  to  mankind. 

The  noble  and  the  brave  who  have  fallen  will  be  hon 
ored.  Their  deeds  of  valor  will  be  rehearsed  by  their 
comrades;  they  will  be  cherished  in  the  family  circle 
made  desolate  by  their  untimely  death ;  their  example 
will  be  transmitted  as  worthy  of  imitation ;  every  village 
churchyard,  every  city  cemetery,  and  the  burial  places  in 
every  rural  neighborhood,  will  exhibit  mausoleums  of 
enduring  marble,  on  which  their  names  and  their  battles 
shall  be  inscribed,  before  which  the  stranger  will  pause  in 
mute  admiration,  and  upon  which  devoted  affection  will 
hang  garlands  of  unfading  laurel.  But  the  most  enduring 
monument  to  their  patriotism  will  be  erected  in  the  hearts 
of  their  countrymen.  From  the  highest  commander  who 
has  fallen,  to  the  private,  each  will  be  held  in  grateful  and 


THE  TRAITOR'S  DOOM,  561 

affectionate  remembrance.  Each  succeeding  generation 
will  embalm  their  memory,  and  time  will  waft  its  fragrance 
until  time  shall  be  no  more ! 


The  patriot's  reward  has  its  counterpart  in  the  traitor's 
doom.  There  are  chapters  in  the  histo  y  of  this  contest 
of  loyalty  and  treason  among  the  darkest  in  the  annals  of 
the  human  race.  If  we  had  an  enemy  on  earth,  we  could 
wish  for  him  no  sorer  punishment  than  that  which  is  in 
store  in  the  righteous  judgment  of  posterity  for  all  those 
who  have  plotted,  instigated,  aided,  abetted,  or  in  any 
\T-'iy>  at  the  South  or  in  the.. North,  helped  on  this  godless 
antfl  heaven-defying  rebellion. 

Of  the  two  classes,-^-those  at  the  South  who  have  open 
ly  aicfed  and  fought  for  it,  and  those  in  the  loyal  States 
who  have  secretly  or  openly  aided  it  while  enjoying  the 
protection  of  the  Government, — the  latter  are  infinitely 
more  abhorred,  both  OQ  earth  and  in  heaven.  Posterity 
will  accord  with  this  judgment,  now  universally  enter 
tained  among  the  loyal.  Every  dictate  of  human  reason 
and  every  principle  of  religion  declares  it. 

"The  memory  of  the- wicked  shall  rot,"  is  a  saying  of 
Holy  Writ.  This  may  prove  true  of  the  "  wicked"  in  this 
rebellion.  T  e  Scripture  does  not  state  when  the  process 
shall  begin  or  when  the  work  §hall  be  finished.  We  trust 
the  period  in  this  case  will  be  distant.  Valuable  purposes 
to  this  nation  and  to  mankind  will  be  served  by  holding 
their  "  memory"  up  to  the  gaze  of  men. 

We  wish  our  children  and  our  children's  children  to 
know  when,  how,  for  what,  and  by  whom,  this  rebellion 
was  begun  and  prosecuted.  We  wish  them  to  know,  from 
the  words  of  the  rebels  themselves,  that  it  was  begun  with 
no  sufficient  reason,  that  it  was  to  overthrow  lawful 


562  REVIEW    AND    CONCLUSION. 

authority,  that  it  was  to  extend  and  perpetuate  human 
bondage.  We  wish  them  to  know  the  agency  of  the 
Church  in  this  work,  the  zeal  of  the  ministers  of  religion, 
and  the  organic  indorsement  of  ecclesiastical  bodies.  We 
wish  them  to  know  the  truth,  and  the  whole  truth,  that 
they  may  understand  the  awful  guilt  of  men,  and  watch 
more  narrowly  the  interests  which  God  has  consigned  to 
their  faithful  keeping. 

Future  Bancrofts  and  Prescotts  will  write  the  elaborate 
histories  of  the  rebellion;  and  we  hope  some  Peter  Parley 
will  tell  its  simple  tale  in  the  pages  which  will  be  read  in 
every  school- house  and  rehearsed  at  every  fireside. 

Let  its  story  thus  go  abroad  over  the  wide  earth  anrj 
among  all  people,  until  the  sun  shall  no  more  rise  npoi\  a 
master  nor  set  upon  a  slave ;  let  it  go  down  through  all 
the  generations  of  men  to  the  end  of  time ;  and  then.,  LET 

THE    MEMORY    OF    THE    WICKED   ROT ! 


THE     END. 


. 

OOOO  OQp  CJC?  CO  0 


tf  CK?  O  0  60  o  0  Cmi1-*  &&£ 


OOOOQO 

O^Quo;Ogo;:i;,o.^: 


O  0  O  0  Vs  0  O  C-  O.0.0X1*  000  00 

-  o  oo  o  o  o;o  06000  oo 

''' 


oo  o 

O'O  OOO  0  " 
0 


. 
C  »X'  0.0.00  0000  00  0 


H  -M.3  c>  O  0  p  DO  p  O  i" 

(>  O  C>  O  C>  0  O  v  6  P  0 <: 

C>0uOt^JY0V-^ 

>.OOOOt>  6:6.6  Oi 

OOOOOOO'0-r- 

0000006000  ;: 


OOfj^oOOOOOOO 
)r;rvr;r;6O<;ooo^ 


